HelluvaHoax!
Platinum Meritorious Sponsor with bells on
If the auditor is going to use a meter, #2 can work fine. The biggest problem with it seems to be its unbelievability. I think any good auditor should be able to do it, once he gets over the idea it's "theoretically" impossible (crappy theory). My introduction to the subject was getting 60 hours of R3X auditing over the phone from Robert Ducharme in 2004, all done with telepathic metering. He didn't miscall one read in all that time, not that I noticed anyway, and I'm very picky.
The other methods of metering via Skype all have big problems, mainly in requiring the pc to have the metering hardware, but also the difficulty of trying to see instant reads over an inherently-laggy connection.
Marty is just being a — hey, what do you get when you cross a Luddite with a Hubbardite?
Paul
Well, if what you and others are claiming is true (telepathic metering) is should easily be provable.
If it is not true that would be good to know, too, wouldn't it?
How about an experiment?
Same set up you described. The auditor and "pc" connected by Skype. The auditor holds the cans. In advance, let's have the pc write down a big wholetrack date at least in the billions, down to the last digit.
Now, the auditor does the dating drill.
Pc says nothing.
Auditor must be able to find the exact date or the experiment is a failure.
Control for the experiment is that another two auditors are also present watching the needle and hearing the commands, but cannot see the pc on Skype. So they are judging only whether it was an instant read or not without the benefit of looking at the pc's indicators.
At the end of the drill all three auditors turn in their worksheets and compare.
Perhaps there are more scientific experiments that could be conducted, but my guess is that they simply cannot do it. I would give them 50 tries and still do not think they could do it. Keep in mind that the main auditor cannot cheat the process if there are two other expert auditors noting the reads.
Fair test?