You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


Q:

How to make node.js require absolute? (instead of relative)

I would like to require my files always by the root of my project and not relative to the current module.
For example if you look at https://github.com/visionmedia/express/blob/2820f2227de0229c5d7f28009aa432f9f3a7b5f9/examples/downloads/app.js line 6 you will see
express = require('../../')

That's really bad IMO. Imagine I would like to put all my examples closer to the root only by one level. That would be impossible, because I would have to update more than 30 examples and many times within each example. To this:
express = require('../')

My solution would be to have a special case for root based: if a string starts with an $ then it's relative to the root folder of the project.
Any help is appreciated, thanks
Update 2
Now I'm using require.js which allows you to write in one way and works both on client and on server. Require.js also allows you to create custom paths.
Update 3
Now I moved to webpack + gulp and I use enhanced-require to handle modules on the server side. See here the rationale: http://hackhat.com/p/110/module-loader-webpack-vs-requirejs-vs-browserify/

A:

And what about:
var myModule = require.main.require('./path/to/module');

It requires the file as if it were required from the main js file, so it works pretty well as long as your main js file is at the root of your project... and that's something I appreciate.

A:

There's a really interesting section in the Browserify Handbook:

avoiding ../../../../../../..
Not everything in an application properly belongs on the public npm
  and the overhead of setting up a private npm or git repo is still
  rather large in many cases. Here are some approaches for avoiding the
  ../../../../../../../ relative paths problem.
node_modules
People sometimes object to putting application-specific modules into
  node_modules because it is not obvious how to check in your internal
  modules without also checking in third-party modules from npm.
The answer is quite simple! If you have a .gitignore file that
  ignores node_modules:
node_modules

You can just add an exception with ! for each of your internal
  application modules:
node_modules/*
!node_modules/foo
!node_modules/bar

Please note that you can't unignore a subdirectory, if the parent is
  already ignored. So instead of ignoring node_modules, you have to
  ignore every directory inside node_modules with the 
  node_modules/* trick, and then you can add your exceptions.
Now anywhere in your application you will be able to require('foo')
  or require('bar') without having a very large and fragile relative
  path.
If you have a lot of modules and want to keep them more separate from
  the third-party modules installed by npm, you can just put them all
  under a directory in node_modules such as node_modules/app:
node_modules/app/foo
node_modules/app/bar

Now you will be able to require('app/foo') or require('app/bar')
  from anywhere in your application.
In your .gitignore, just add an exception for node_modules/app:
node_modules/*
!node_modules/app

If your application had transforms configured in package.json, you'll
  need to create a separate package.json with its own transform field in
  your node_modules/foo or node_modules/app/foo component directory
  because transforms don't apply across module boundaries. This will
  make your modules more robust against configuration changes in your
  application and it will be easier to independently reuse the packages
  outside of your application.
symlink
Another handy trick if you are working on an application where you can
  make symlinks and don't need to support windows is to symlink a lib/
  or app/ folder into node_modules. From the project root, do:
ln -s ../lib node_modules/app

and now from anywhere in your project you'll be able to require files
  in lib/ by doing require('app/foo.js') to get lib/foo.js.
custom paths
You might see some places talk about using the $NODE_PATH
  environment variable or opts.paths to add directories for node and
  browserify to look in to find modules.
Unlike most other platforms, using a shell-style array of path
  directories with $NODE_PATH is not as favorable in node compared to
  making effective use of the node_modules directory.
This is because your application is more tightly coupled to a runtime
  environment configuration so there are more moving parts and your
  application will only work when your environment is setup correctly.
node and browserify both support but discourage the use of
  $NODE_PATH.

A:

I like to make a new node_modules folder for shared code, then let node and require do what it does best. 
for example:
- node_modules // => these are loaded from your package.json
- app
  - node_modules // => add node-style modules
    - helper.js
  - models
    - user
    - car
- package.json
- .gitignore

For example, if you're in car/index.js you can require('helper') and node will find it!
How node_modules Work
node has a clever algorithm for resolving modules that is unique among rival
platforms.
If you require('./foo.js') from /beep/boop/bar.js, node will look for ./foo.js in /beep/boop/foo.js. Paths that start with a ./ or ../ are always local to the file that calls require().
If however you require a non-relative name such as require('xyz') from /beep/boop/foo.js, node searches these paths in order, stopping at the first match and raising an error if nothing is found:
/beep/boop/node_modules/xyz
/beep/node_modules/xyz
/node_modules/xyz

For each xyz directory that exists, node will first look for a xyz/package.json to see if a "main" field exists. The "main" field defines which file should take charge if you require() the directory path.
For example, if /beep/node_modules/xyz is the first match and /beep/node_modules/xyz/package.json has:
{
  "name": "xyz",
  "version": "1.2.3",
  "main": "lib/abc.js"
}

then the exports from /beep/node_modules/xyz/lib/abc.js will be returned by
require('xyz').
If there is no package.json or no "main" field, index.js is assumed:
/beep/node_modules/xyz/index.js