(07-17-2016, 08:33 PM)Gotcha Wrote:(07-17-2016, 08:17 PM)Shannon Wrote: According to the modeling runs I have done on this, it took 5-10 minutes for bartendress S, and less than 5 minutes for bartender M, to be affected enough to change their thinking. Very [/b]
That does indeed sound odd. I mean, how could you possibly model their thinking? What data do you base your assumptions on?
Just curious...
There turn out to be a variety of ways to accurately deduce what someone's thought processes are. I can't reveal my methods or how my models work, of course, but I will say that if you understand the right things about how people and reality work, reading minds isn't quite the astounding thing it used to seem to be. As it turns out, we make our "private" thoughts known outside of us in several ways, and with the right understanding and the right set of correlative data, it's relatively obvious.
Think of it as an advanced, very accurate and extra-revealing way to read body language in this case.
We're not going on assumptions.
Subliminal Audio Specialist & Administrator
The scientist has a question to find an answer for. The pseudo-scientist has an answer to find a question for. ~ "Failure is the path of least persistence." - Chinese Fortune Cookie ~ Logic left. Emotion right. But thinking, straight ahead. ~ Sperate supra omnia in valorem. (The value of trust is above all else.) ~ Meowsomeness!
The scientist has a question to find an answer for. The pseudo-scientist has an answer to find a question for. ~ "Failure is the path of least persistence." - Chinese Fortune Cookie ~ Logic left. Emotion right. But thinking, straight ahead. ~ Sperate supra omnia in valorem. (The value of trust is above all else.) ~ Meowsomeness!