The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
in poker if I put my money in with aces and you put your money in with fives you know 80 ish percent to win there so it better that means 80% of the time I'm gonna win but that doesn't mean that you can't win 20% of the time you can win and I have no control either way I don't know if on that particular iteration I'm gonna see the 80% of their 20% that really crosses all decision-making
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.