The human brain can hold finite information in an active or conscious state for only so long without it becoming the dominant frequency, the new current center of consciousness. lf opportunity to discharge or purge held information occurs after a short enough period of time, the brain is refreshed and can then take on more information and remain at peak efficiency.

When the amount of time the person forces his/her brain to hold information is too long, each bit of information gains power and solidity far beyond its original purpose. Each portion of this code that has to be "thought of" again is now capable of "grabbing control" and throwing every other part of the brain into a "wait" state.

An analogy is that a thought should be a task instantaneously called-in, executed, and then deactivated, but once put into a wait state or a hold state, becomes core resident and then begins to become a closed-loop, keeping other tasks from running.

As one task slows down to wait for another program or task it gains strength chemically and then gets put into a hold state, and what was a smooth-functioning system becomes exponentially a collection of random thoughts all with closed-loop, imperfect code; and coded to "run" at different frenquencies. In other words, the person finds him/her Self now dissociated, and functionally schizophrenic.

What was only a task has taken on the status of an operating system, psychologically for the person, and to finish such a system is a fight to the death of their own psyche. This is the reason so many computer programmers "freak out" and think they need to quit the company, and find a better one.

It is a natural function of the mental trip this sort of work lays on a person's mind. To me, it seems the mental model of the program in the persons mind tends to take control of his personality, and if his program is poorly, rather incompletely thought out, so will his approach to it, his ability to be objective, and his ability to bring it to completion. Elements missing at the beginning of a gestalt will keep the gestalt from happening naturally as fast as it would have. Like trying to solve a set of simultaneous equations, with some of the equations missing, the effectiveness of the mind in such a gestalt will be minimal.

ldeally, each task should be broken into portions which can be done, as far as the mind is concerned, in one day, a week at most. Certainly not more than one lunar cycle. Whatever information gathering or design is necessary should be done so that the person who makes manifest programs from prepotential thoughts can have all the equations at the beginning. Any elements entered into the gestalt after it's start are in effect, diluting the energy without bringing the initial gestalt to a close. Once the initial gestalt is over, the brain is chemically coded to function at higher efficiency. Anything which prolongs the closure of the original gestalt, such as changing the testing environment and having unreliable hardware, locks a person's mind into the process aspect, and what should take one day at high energy time, takes one year at dissociated energy time.

A mind overly congested with detail it has not had an opportunity to discharge becomes like a disc drive with hardly any free blocks. Constant abuse of the orderliness of the mind leads to a condition much like having lost track of many of the disk blocks, making effective usable space smaller and smaller.

The system structure of the mind is composed of closed and open gestalts, or tasks, arranged in some interlocking hierarchy of levels of function. The conscious mind is the union of the overviewer or debug program, which can only "look into" the unconscious, and the single-task closed-loop state which seems to occur at regular intervals.

Conscious mind can be used to "drive" the unconscious mind, to "program" it to do what it, the conscious mind, desires, but only when all the spaces in the mind are free, and in a common pool, i.e., when encoded with the same runtime frequencies. Until that point, there will be conflicting programs, a feeling of insecurity. This is the same function as depression, repression or almost anything else about the mind. And a very heavy lesson it is.

The power of the conscious mind to "drive" the unconscious mind is dependent somehow upon the confidence level, the past victories divided by the past failures. Unpredictable and undependable circumstances, constant frustration, which could be eliminated, and radical changes, serve to lower the confidence level. The problem of making your Self mind you is magnified, taking attention, time slots away from the work at hand, stealing cycles.

Any change serves to lengthen the time period of the gestalt, complicate and congest the mental model the programmer uses to keep his/her work together. The mind fatigues at looking at the same code and, out of self-defense, makes changes.

Excessive worrying about the performance of a person, much like radio-wave jamming, makes that person's work just that much harder. Projecting hard-edge nots, cants, etc., to a person's name has the same effect as hypnotising him/her to do poorly. Interacting with the person at the negative, resisting freguencies, instead of at the positive, happening frequencies, doing whatever you can to make their job easier, prolongs completion of whatever gestalt is in progress.

Arbitrary assignment of people to tasks without allowing their inputs into the decision is to waste the expertise already paid for. Commitments to due dates have the effect of auto suggestion, and if once ignored, altered arbitrarily, or inadequately respected, become inverted into a commitment to not finish. The problem of bringing the gestalt to a close grows larger, the person now the unwitting tool of his/her dissociated mind.

The basic algorithm of the mind is analogous to realtime systems, and the most basic function is the gestalt. I have a very thorough understanding of mental function and how to improve the mind, to debug it, and can provide counseling as to how to structure the working environment of a realtime systems house for any application. I am a generalist who can zero in to specifics. I have the answers you were looking for.

I have minicomputer experience at all levels, from complete systems, executive control routines included, to simple tasks and also special-purpose languages. But my real value to you can be in a consultant, or advisory role. I have observed the same mistakes being made in systems houses everywhere I have been involved. The only answer to the seemingly unsolvable complexities of trying to manage software systems, is to attack the software persons' function with a total system approach, considering the limits within which a human being can function at optimal efficiency, and to structure the environment around that. If this is done, the time required to put out a system will be measured in days rather than weeks or months, or years.

No one in this business should attempt to manage projects this large without studying the requirements and functions of the human biocomputer: communication, meditation techniques, nutritional requirements, etc. People are not machines, and yet they are, and if you learn to work with, rather than against their best programs, you will manage to keep a stable shop, and make money.

l foresee a future wherein each software specialist/generalist assumes a role much like the doctor or lawyer, and are permanently available, whereas supposedly "permanent" employees can quit at two-weeks notice, and do quite regularly. You were concerned that you need to depend upon people like ****, missing the fact that you now have more contacts sitting in your bay than ***** has access to. Each of the consultant's knows more people on a stable basis that will be permanently available, than people like ****** use.

This industry is a fledgling, still on the periphery of the unknown, not quite formed. I am looking forward to doing some really creative work with minicomputers, to doing some work "for money", as long as there is money, and i hope to be able to work with people i know and trust, that become my friends, so that we can really help each other.

I welcome you into this, if you want it. I am gathering together a retinue of others like me, geniuses,

who can expand the possibilities of others, to form a loose-knit organization, a group-mind for whatever purpose manifests.

I will be in the future, if not now, a very good source for people. I will prefer to work on short-term commitments, renewable in units of time, and to have very specific written agreements as to what i expect from you and what i commit to. The rates will vary according to the climate you furnish.