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]


The besieged Wall Street bank Goldman Sachs, which is fighting a $1bn (£650m) fraud prosecution, faced hours of attacks by angry lawmakers for putting its own profits before clients' interests as it dispensed complex mortgage-backed securities branded as "shitty" and as "crap pools" by its own traders.

In an unusually gruelling political examination of a single company, senior Goldman executives struggled to justify seemingly flawed deals struck at the height of the credit crunch. Dan Sparks, the head of the bank's mortgage unit, conceded: "We made a number of poor business decisions, especially in hindsight."

The hearing marked a first public appearance for London-based Goldman banker Fabrice Tourre, who masterminded a 2007 deal named Abacus that has been branded as fraudulent by the Securities and Exchange commission.

The Frenchman rebutted "unfounded attacks" on his character but admitted errors of judgement in a series of emails that joked about Goldman's creation of "Frankenstein" financial products. The emails to his girlfriend, made public over the weekend, had appeared to demean his work as "intellectual masturbation" and as production of "Frankenstein" products.

Since being sued by the SEC two weeks ago, Goldman has faced a deluge of public and political criticism over its apparent success in making profits from the financial crisis. One Democratic senator, Claire McCaskill, accused the bank's executives of creating derivatives "in the La-La Land of ledger entries", adding: "You had less oversight than a pit boss in Las Vegas."

The seven past and present Goldman executives appearing in Congress were greeted by protestors in prison uniform, bearing placards reading Stop looting America! and Shame. Goldman's chief executive, Lloyd Blankfein, at times struggled with the tone of hostility, assuring lawmakers that he had no better foresight of the US economy than others in the market: "I don't think we're that smart."

The SEC's prosecution of Goldman focuses on a single transaction in which the firm is charged with tricking clients into investing in a mortgage package known as a synthetic CDO that was filled with doomed home loans. Several similar transactions have since come to light.

One $300m package, named Anderson, was created in March 2007 from mortgages written by a defunct sub-prime specialist, New Century, and the financial product was downgraded from a triple-A rating to junk within seven months.

Another, a $1bn package called Timberwolf, was branded as a "shitty deal" in an internal email by Thomas Montag, then Goldman's head of sales and trading for the Americas. The chairman of the Senate committee, Carl Levin, repeated the phrase more than a dozen times, repeatedly demanding whether Goldman should be selling mortgages that it privately looked upon so poorly.

Asked about messages describing Goldman products in such terms, the bank's chief financial officer, David Viniar, drew gasps in the room by replying: "I think that's very unfortunate to have on email." Viniar quickly clarified his remarks to say he felt it was unfortunate for an employee to say in any form. But later, Goldman's chief executive struck a different note, insisting that the bank's true views on the fate of complex financial products was of little relevance to those buying them.

"The thing customers are buying is exposure," said Blankfein. "The thing they're buying gives them the risk they want. They're not coming to us because of what our views are."

At times, the chasm in outlook between Washington and Wall Street seemed impossible to bridge. Blankfein needed a pause to recollect that his annual bonus last year had been $9m. The former presidential candidate John McCain told him that the US public, still struggling with unemployment and foreclosures, was not impressed: "The idea that Wall Street has come out of this thing just fine, thank you, is something that really grates with people," he said.

It emerged that as many as 90% of the loans in certain mortgage packages securitised by Goldman had been written on a so-called "stated income" basis, meaning that homeowners were not required to offer any proof of their salaries on mortgage applications.

Tourre, who has been on paid leave from Goldman since being singled out in the SEC's prosecution, defended the complex products he had put together: "To the average person, the utility of these products may not be obvious. But they permit sophisticated institutions to customise the exposures they wish to take in order to better manage the credit and market risks of their investment holdings."

Goldman's difficulties have prompted a 17% fall in the bank's share price over the last two weeks. Analysts fear that if charges against the firm stand up, an erosion in reputation could lead to an exodus of customers. Even prior to the SEC's prosecution, Goldman had been pilloried for being a key counter-party in swaps that led to the collapse of the insurer AIG and for taking "short" positions in advance of the collapse in America's housing market.