AION

jUST imagine the terror women would create if they were as strong as men but keeping their female temperament, that would be scary as fuck.

@Ramanujan just go with Owen. He is a safe bet. I saw his infield and it is very natural and authentic making a real connection while Todd comes off as he is running a script and just pushing buttons.

You should try it out and see if it works for you.

He is cringe and his methods are cringe. He never talks in his natural voice which makes it very forced.

Every model has its pro´s and cons. The best is to learn from multiple teachers. Mystery works for me now because I can be autistic sometimes it helps me to move things forward and plan things forward. It also helped to iron out some of my flaws, like first get IOI before giving IOI and stuff. Most teachers don´t explicate that. So how is it outdated. This is his model: Mystery's M3 Model — Full Sub-Steps Attract A1 — Open: Approach the group, not just the target. Overcome approach anxiety, begin DHV signaling A2 — Female to Male Interest: She becomes curious about you; you've triggered attraction A3 — Male to Female Interest: Now you show selective interest — but only after qualifying her. She has to earn it Comfort C1 — Isolate: Separate her from the group naturally C2 — Rapport: Deep connection, vulnerability, personal sharing, building genuine trust C3 — Physical Comfort: Progressive touch escalation, first kiss threshold Seduction S1 — Sexual Framing: Shift the frame toward sexual tension explicitly S2 — Last Minute Resistance: Navigate hesitation without pressure S3 — Close

Why Pickup Doesn't Work — Summary Jeffrey (the presenter, a 23-year veteran dating coach) opens by scrolling past a Mystery clip — Mystery of VH1/The Game fame — still explaining his elaborate A3/IOD/DHV jargon system in 2026. Jeffrey's take is deliberately uncomfortable: the system works. Human psychology didn't get a software update. Curiosity, tension, emotional spikes, qualifying, rapport — none of that changed. The hardware is the same. So what's the problem? The Core Diagnosis: Apps Without an Operating System The early pickup community made a fundamental category error: they packaged performance skills as verbal techniques. Mystery wasn't some bedroom theorist who cracked a code — he was a professional stage magician with thousands of live audience reps before he ever entered a nightclub. He already had stage presence as an underlying substrate. When he ran a routine, it landed because his nervous system was broadcasting: "I'm relaxed, I don't need this to work, I thrive under attention." The guy watching at 2am memorizing the same lines? His nervous system is broadcasting: "Please love me. Please don't reject me." And people feel that signal before they even process the words. They don't analyze it consciously — they just feel "nope." Jeffrey calls this the "uncanny valley of charisma": close enough to the real thing to register as slightly creepy, not close enough to land. There's a half-second latency between the person and the persona they're performing, and that gap is felt immediately. The OGs never consciously built presence either — they accrued it through tens of thousands of pressure reps. They were teaching the apps. Nobody was installing the operating system, which is presence. What Presence Actually Means Presence here isn't a mystical concept — it's embodied congruence. The body is stable, the signal is clean, and what comes out matches what's underneath. Jeffrey's formula: State → Signal → Behavior → Words When your nervous system is stable, the techniques hit. When it collapses under social pressure, everything feels like "punching in a dream" — slow, heavy, ineffective. Biology, he argues, is always running one check in every interaction: congruence. Is this person actually here? In a world saturated with synthetic experience, genuine presence is increasingly rare and therefore disproportionately magnetic. Why It's Worse Now Jeffrey identifies two compounding factors that have made the presence gap much wider than it was 20 years ago: 1. Algorithmic attention fragmentation. Modern social media platforms are highly engineered systems that know your nervous system better than you do. They never give you full satisfaction — just enough stimulation to keep scrolling. This systematically erodes the capacity for sustained, embodied attention, which is precisely the substrate presence is built on. 2. Social rep starvation + identity fragmentation. COVID lockdowns wiped out social reps and people never fully returned. On top of that, most people are now running 4-5 simultaneous selves (online self, professional self, dating self, etc.). Every context switch burns energy. By the time you walk into a real venue, you're already depleted. The body responds by going into a low-grade survival mode — shallow breath, chest tightening, system contracting inward — which kills the signal before a word is even spoken. The Performance Addiction Problem Jeffrey distinguishes two types of performance addiction. His own — loving attention, thriving in front of a crowd — is generative. The kind most guys have is defensive: performing a sanitized, "safe" character to avoid rejection. This is driven by a hollowed-out nervous system that has learned over thousands of micro-moments of self-suppression to simply stop showing up. You get an impulse to speak or approach, your internal monitoring system evaluates it for social risk, and before it can live — you kill it. Repeat that thousands of times and the system stops generating impulses at all. Analysis during the process is specifically identified as the kill shot: monitoring your own words mid-sentence, modeling how you look, micromanaging others' perceptions of you, running internal commentary while simultaneously talking. That kills the signal immediately. The Conclusion You don't have a charisma problem. You have a nervous system calibration problem and a learned performance addiction. The techniques aren't the issue and never were — they were always pointing at what lies underneath them. Once the underlying state is stable and the signal is clean, the techniques function like steroids on an already-working foundation. Without it, you're loading software onto a crashed machine. The real question, he closes with, was never what do I say — it was always: can you hold the moment when it turns toward you, and not blink?

I downloaded the app, and the books in the app are pop culture books. Most of them I already read. I did couple of lessons and it is not a bad app for regular people I guess. If you have a claude subscription you can basically do the same with claude AI or any other AI. Just ask it to create bite sized lessons of a book and let is create exercises. And at the end you can contemplate with AI, but you can´t contemplate with such an app. I´m reading Peter Ralston´s book and what I did is basically load it up to claude and after I read the book it gives me exercises and topics we can contemplate about. It is much better than such apps. From what I have seen is that this app deepstash is made with AI. Most of the pics they use are AI generated so I wouldn´t be surprised if the text-code is generated by AI too.

I know it is hard to formalize it but as long as it can be formalized I think the M3 model by mystery is the best. All other models are a cheap rip off. So best formalized model is M3 by Mystery. The best technicality with its beginner, middle and end game Best informalized model is Owen Cook. He has the best meta physics. If you know both you can be deadly. Owen Cook is more difficult to learn because of the share volume of his content it is hard to extract the gold but I did by crunching all of his videos and seminars into a corpus with the help of AI. What is your favorite model?

yes

If you have the face only a mother could love, church is the best option. Go to different ones. Most women go to church to connect for something serious.

Scarcity versus abundance principle is a general principle in economics which also applies to dating. There are different things at play to but that doesn´t discredit this principle.

Something being hard to get means it is valuable. I wouldn’t want a girl that is too available either because that means she has too many notches on her belt which also means a lot of emotional baggage. I think a lot of guys think like this but obviously there are some exceptions. Another thing is that she can be hard to get for you because you are not valuable in her eyes and be open to another guy who she might she as valuable. I’m a guy who never goes for hard to get. It is too much work. I usually date a little bit below my level which means it is more easy but usually they aren’t stunning. That is the trade off.

There is no reason to be happy about this. Although I totally disagree with his philosophy there is some grain of truth in what he says. Most humans are very shallow. I can be shallow too in my dating preferences and that is ok. People react to raw instinctive attraction and that is not going to change very soon.

opus 4.7 is out

Western europe is like Eden