u/Top_Strawberry8110

How can this be prevented? This unsolicited behaviour results in high credit usage.

First of all,

1)I am no expert in hadith.

2)Think this is a general question regarding historical methodologies and not exclusive to hadith verification methods.

Be it any of the different traditional methods, modern ICM or the HCM.

I see two ways in which the veracity of a method can be assessed:

1)Purely deductive ones, in which the factors affecting transmission are modeled and it is understood that the method would or not result in reliable verification. For instance, showing how a method exhaustively rules out the incorporation of fabrications, or showing that a method has open doors and can't reliably exclude fabrications. God knows best, but it seems to me that whole societies transmitting things, with all the possibilities involved, are very difficult to model.

2)Empirical ones, in which we wouldn't try to model the process but to find out empirically how reliable a method is. That would include:

a)Conducting an experiment repeating the original conditions in which we see how much of the verified sayings were actually told at the beginning, which is not feasible as it's not hidden from any rational being.

b)Comparing what is said in hadith with things that are known to be reliably established, such as the Qur'an or otherwise historically firmly established.

So, for instance, what is the sensitivity and specificity of the currently most widespread hadith method? Is a hadith classed as sahih 100% true? 95%? 80%? 70%? 30%? 5%?. Note that my question is not about which of these percentages is the correct one, but about how would we even justify them.. This is not a trivial matter at all, nor a nitpicking about "not being able to quantify to the last decimal". A method being 85% reliable or 100% reliable has huge implications.

Context:

-I am not a full vibe coder in the strict sense. I do definitely look at the code, write code and micro-manage things that I want to be a certain way.

-I used to fully manually code before using AI.

-I am using it for React.

I don't have an annual subscription so I am paying per use.

I am finding it able to do most of the things I ask for and to debug a great deal of the bugs.

The cost, despite per million tokens of paper being much higher than the Chinese models such as Deepseek V4 flash, I have found to be very similar in actual usage, with Raptor Mini being much faster (using ZooCode i.e. Roo for that with OpenRouter).

I was switching from Copilot to ZooCode with OpenRouter in order to benefit from the pricing of Chinese models after the price regularization in GitHub Copilot but Raptor Mini is making me use Deepseek V4 flash less and less. And Copilot's integration with VSCode is simply much better than Zoo. The only "problem" is that being faster makes me be able to do more things and thus spend more money.. lol. Furthermore it supports images unless V4 flash with OpenRouter.

I understand that for zero-code strict vibe coding it may cause a lot of headache and it won't end well. But for my use case it does the job at an excellent price.

I suddenly found "auto" selected and Raptor Mini was no longer available.

It simply says that my sensor's data were "erroneous", adding that it may be due to it being loose. But it wasn't loose at all. To the contrary, it was pretty, pretty tight. I was wearing it in the biceps.

Has this happened to anyone and have you been able to find a solution?

I bought VS in order to benefit from the Sleep² app and then realized it would be great as a running HR monitor, but unfortunately it doesn't stream to my Smartwatch. I was thinking of acquiring the cheapest thing that would allow me to check VS's hearth rate measurements live when I go running phoneless.

I don't need any other functionality as I already have a smartwatch, I just want to be able to check my HR live.