06-21-2016, 07:15 AM
ASRB-related question/suggestion for Shannon: To offset compounding 5.5G exhaustion, could more tightly-packed contiguous loops benefit from progressively longer ASRB silences? You've only mentioned constant ASRB values per sub, but exhaustion is more cumulative than constant. Have you tested any linear or logarithmic incremental increases in silence duration? Less noise-silence ratio, more data pipeline management?
I'd also wonder if it wouldn't help to explain why AOSI (which has even more borrowed 6G tech to exhaust us than E2) favors shorter daily loop counts, if a measly 15 minutes of rest is more optimal by loop 2 than it is by loop 12. I've set my computer to auto-increment sleep values between loops, which works well for me and maximizes daily loop count without me having to space them out manually (the goal of ASRB, I'd assume), while others on the forum have started to mention more ad-hoc/manual methods of spacing them out. Yesterday, I set the increments as a multiple of the Fibonacci sequence for fun. Today, I might try the Mandelbrot set. This may also be a definition for the word "fun" of which no one in their right minds was previously aware.
I'd also wonder if it wouldn't help to explain why AOSI (which has even more borrowed 6G tech to exhaust us than E2) favors shorter daily loop counts, if a measly 15 minutes of rest is more optimal by loop 2 than it is by loop 12. I've set my computer to auto-increment sleep values between loops, which works well for me and maximizes daily loop count without me having to space them out manually (the goal of ASRB, I'd assume), while others on the forum have started to mention more ad-hoc/manual methods of spacing them out. Yesterday, I set the increments as a multiple of the Fibonacci sequence for fun. Today, I might try the Mandelbrot set. This may also be a definition for the word "fun" of which no one in their right minds was previously aware.
