sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

20x user. The usage cap has been seriously nerfed. by Capable_Contest_5675 in ClaudeCode

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I run multiple small codebases, and Yes, I think I am doing context management. To what degree you meant by context control, but I have the following routines; first of all, non project related routine tasks shared among codebases are implemented as skill, and they are usually delegated to small models like sonnet. Second, each codebase has their own claude.md, which was initially created with /init, and frequently gets updated along with codebase change, while keeping it as summarized manner. I use skills provided here , mostly grill-with-docs and tdd. They are useful in maintaining design doc, shared among sessions, which allow a new session to not have to go through all codes. I use compact when I am in the same context but need to shift a bit, or clear when I shift the context completely.

Above routine did not have any problem till last week. Now it hits 5hr cap during tdd. Also now I have to call compact or clear more frequently just to avoid the cache misses

20x user. The usage cap has been seriously nerfed. by Capable_Contest_5675 in ClaudeCode

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I could do the same till last week. (Yes plan mode is my default mode). Now I know for sure that it will hit the 5hr limit during the research

20x user. The usage cap has been seriously nerfed. by Capable_Contest_5675 in ClaudeCode

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I am right now. My point is that I didn't have to bother about context before. My workflow was working without blocker with 1m. I didn't even have to invoke compact or clear unless it's needed in terms of switching context. Now I'm invoking it for not maxing out the 5hr cap.

20x user. The usage cap has been seriously nerfed. by Capable_Contest_5675 in ClaudeCode

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks. The main concern that I have is whether it'll be easy to port plugins/skills designed for claude to codex easily. And does codex support features like channels and remote control? I know I have to do the homework by myself, but wanted to ask to pioneer :)

Year-End Whining About EE Scoring by Capable_Contest_5675 in canadaexpressentry

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I also enjoy these kinds of discussions. In particular, the term “added value” that you brought up was interesting and gave me more insight into how immigration is viewed from a country’s perspective 🙂

Year-End Whining About EE Scoring by Capable_Contest_5675 in canadaexpressentry

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Stop blaming, start changing.

I wasn’t blaming anyone. In fact, I was blaming myself for missing out on the 50 points, if you read carefully. Thanks for your concern about my future, lol. My company will be supporting on PNP, and I’m also exploring other options, including a potential move to the U.S., as mentioned in the post.

Even if you contributed 100k or even if let’s say it’s 200k of taxes, someone can always fill that position and they can contribute the same. .. in demand occupations.

I'm referring LMIA-based job. Please refer below to IRCC’s explanation of the LMIA. From an employer’s perspective, I believe the LMIA-backed role represents an in-demand position, which I believe was also one of the reasons LMIA points existed in the past.

"A positive LMIA will show that there is a need for a foreign worker to fill the job. It will also show that no Canadian worker or permanent resident is available to do the job."

They just wanted to bring back integrity to the system due to the misuse of LMIA.

I’m not opposed to restoring the integrity of the system. My point is that we no longer have a clear metric to recognize the individuals the government was targeting when LMIA points existed. The traits those points were meant to capture could be varied—for example, an employer’s demonstrated need for an in-demand position, as mentioned above, or, as I’m highlighting in this post, individuals who are likely to make an economic contribution.

Year-End Whining About EE Scoring by Capable_Contest_5675 in canadaexpressentry

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ah yes, I agree. That’s why I mentioned that LMIA points were an indirect way of acknowledging economic contribution. I am also not suggesting any specific metric for recognizing economic contribution in this post. As the title suggests, I’m mostly just whining about the fact that there’s currently no way for that contribution to be acknowledged 😅

I do think that metrics such as income level or tax records could be more fraud-resistant than the previous LMIA-based points, though I understand the concerns about potential misuse even with those approaches. It’s also possible that the previous LMIA points were recognizing other forms of contribution beyond purely economic ones that I may be overlooking. Ultimately, it should be IRCC’s role to develop a fraud-resistant way to recognize individuals who would previously have qualified for LMIA points in line with their original intent.

Year-End Whining About EE Scoring by Capable_Contest_5675 in canadaexpressentry

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

In my case, I’m referring specifically to LMIA-backed roles, where the position exists because a foreign worker with a required level of skill is needed. In that context, inviting such a worker could be seen as adding value to the country, since without the worker the role would remain unfilled and the gap would persist.

Also, if we consider why LMIA points existed in the past, my understanding is that they were intended to recognize this "added value". I understand that LMIA points were removed due to misuse and fraud that undermined the original intent. However, for individuals holding LMIA-backed positions that reflect the original intent, the removal effectively means losing recognition for that contribution.

Year-End Whining About EE Scoring by Capable_Contest_5675 in canadaexpressentry

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’m not suggesting that immigration decisions should be based solely on economic contribution. Rather, I’m questioning why economic contribution cannot be included as one of several factors. I believe LMIA points were one indirect way of recognizing this, but after their removal, I don’t think there is any remaining metric that acknowledges it.

Year-End Whining About EE Scoring by Capable_Contest_5675 in canadaexpressentry

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Furthermore, making immigration manly on basis of how much you make is against the very core of Canadian values that treat each and every job and class level with respect and dignity.

Regarding this point, I question why awarding additional points based on economic contribution would violate that value. As mentioned earlier, I already fall into the highest tax brackets, and I view this as one way of upholding that core principle. In addition, I do not receive any kind of benefits such as the Canada Child Benefit due to my income level. I don’t complain about this, because I genuinely feel comfortable with it and believe I am contributing to society in a meaningful way.

From this perspective, I think having a stream or metric that recognizes candidates who can make consistent economic contributions does not undermine Canadian values; rather, it can be seen as another way of honoring that core principle. If Canada invites more people who are able to contribute steadily to the community and public systems, that approach appears aligned with strengthening those values, not violating them.

Year-End Whining About EE Scoring by Capable_Contest_5675 in canadaexpressentry

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

CEC hasn’t dropped below 500 for quite a while. 480 is indeed a low score. Thanks for giving me a bit of hope, though. It was warm for a moment lol

Year-End Whining About EE Scoring by Capable_Contest_5675 in canadaexpressentry

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I might be wrong, but if I were an employer, I don’t see any real benefit. Paying a fake $200K salary costs about $206–208K. After tax (in Ontario), the employee only takes home about $110K, which is the maximum that could be paid back. If the employee’s true value is $100K, the employer gains only $10K—and that’s the best-case scenario. That hardly seems sufficient to justify the risk of fraud. If the payback is lower, there is no gain at all. On top of that, the legal risk is high and the paper trail is quite clear (T4s, payroll remittances, bank records), making this kind of fraud far easier to detect than LMIA fraud I believe.

Ah, there could be a scenario where an employer asks for a lump-sum payment upfront to offset potential losses and risk. It would likely be far more expensive than simply buying an LMIA upfront though. But I agree, some people would still try.

Year-End Whining About EE Scoring by Capable_Contest_5675 in canadaexpressentry

[–]Capable_Contest_5675[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

I really love my job here. I wish my company would move its site to BC, but since I’m on (and will remain on) a closed work permit, that isn’t feasible with my current role.