1,298 karma · joined February 4, 2023
“Claude review raises Codex drafts from 71.6% to 89.7%; Codex self review raises them to 84.5%. The reverse direction does not pay off: Codex reviewing Claude drafts drops the pass rate from 91.4% to 82.8%, and Claude self review leaves the 91.4% baseline unchanged.”
The highest pass rate was to use just Claude, at 91.4%. Claude reviewing Claude did not improve the pass rate.
In fact I’d say the entire system of weekly quotas and resets seems quite poorly designed. A constant rate continuous recharging model would work much better, like a battery. No arbitrary usage period phasing, no waiting for 5:45am on Sunday morning for your quota to reset. There would be no worrying about how your specific reset time aligns with the additional random resets or model availability. That would be a much better user experience and would cost them nothing.
One minute I'm trying to use an entire week's worth of quota in less than 24 hours, then moments later I read the deadline has been punted and I have only 25% remaining to last me an entire week. This alone is enough for me to switch back to Codex once my current Claude sub ends.
One minute I'm trying to use an entire week's worth of quota in less than 24 hours, then moments later I read the deadline has been punted and I have only 25% remaining to last me an entire week. This alone is enough for me to switch back to Codex once my current Claude sub ends.
I would like to know what it did the other 23.4% of the time!
Corollary: use your quota now because a reset seems likely.
After reading the study, should we update our posterior on the hypothesis that cannabis use causes cardiovascular disease to nudge it in the direction that it does? Yes - that's just Bayes' theorem. Does the probability go to 95%+? No, of course not; I'm not claiming otherwise. It's still useful research.
Also, worth noting that MI risk spikes several-fold within the first hour after cannabis use (and that's not caused by cocaine).
> This retrospective cohort study utilized the TriNetX health research network, which aggregates deidentified electronic medical records from health care organizations worldwide.
> 1) The cannabis-user group with cannabis use diagnoses (International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision: F12.1, F12.9, F12.90).
You can't expect them to work miracles and come up with data they didn't have. They produced a valuable piece of research furthering our understanding of the cardiovascular risks of cannabis use based on a very large existing dataset that was available to them.
Of course they would love to be able to answer the question of whether smoking is worse for your heart than edibles and so on, and they stated they would like to do this in a future study. But that costs time and money to create an entirely new dataset, and you know what funding for science is like these days.
There's plenty of other evidence in the literature on the cardiovascular effects of THC if you want to see what our current understanding is there. TL;DR: smoking is worse than vaping or edibles; myocardial infarction risk spikes within the first few hours of using cannabis; but the risks are not limited to inhalation because THC itself has physiological effects that raise cardiovascular risk factors (increased heart rate, endothelial dysfunction, platelet activation raising clotting risk, inflammation and oxidative stress, etc.).
> The findings are from a retrospective study of over 4.6 million people published in JACC Advances and a meta-analysis of 12 previously published studies being presented at the American College of Cardiology's Annual Scientific Session (ACC.25).
> Kamel and his team conducted the retrospective study using data from TriNetX, a global health research network that provides access to electronic medical records. Their findings indicate that over an average follow-up of over three years, cannabis users had more than a sixfold increased risk of heart attack, fourfold increased risk of ischemic stroke, twofold increased risk of heart failure and threefold increased risk of cardiovascular death, heart attack or stroke. All study participants were younger than age 50 and free of significant cardiovascular comorbidities at baseline, with blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels within a healthy range and no diabetes, tobacco use or prior coronary artery disease.
While it will come off subscriptions after July 7th, we aim to restore Fable as a standard part of our subscriptions as soon as capacity allows, as we mentioned in our original blog post."
The party will be short-lived.
- DHHB / Uvinul A Plus
- EHT / Uvinul T150
- MBBT / Tinosorb M
- Iscotrizinol / Uvasorb HEB
- Drometrizole trisiloxane - Mexoryl XL
- Methoxypropylamino cyclohexenylidene ethoxyethylcyanoacetate - Mexoryl 400
- Polysilicone-15 - Parsol SLX
- Disodium phenyl dibenzimidazole tetrasulfonate - Neo Heliopan AP
- Tris-biphenyl triazine - Tinosorb A2B
- Phenylene bis-diphenyltriazine - TriAsorB
- Diethylhexyl syringylidene malonate (photostabilizer)
If you live in the US, you are quite literally taking a risk with your health using US-made sunscreens. Luckily brands like Beauty of Joseon (Korean) and many others are readily available through sites like Yamibuy.
Outside of the US, London (+5.4% annual growth in 2026) is probably the biggest concentration, with high quality inexpensive talent available from universities both within London (ICL, UCL, King's etc.) and from the nearby Oxford and Cambridge universities. Much of that talent used to flow to the US, but given the current administration and restrictions on H-1B, may now be more likely to stay in the UK.
Singapore (+26.7%) is growing very fast and is now in the top 10.
Source: https://www.startupblink.com/blog/best-cities-for-startups-a...