Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A Research Preview of Codex

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 487 posts

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#291

Post by Buttons840 »

dimal wrote: post #283
voidspark wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly the problem. The top level executives are setting up to retire with billions in the bank, while the workers develop their own replacements before they retire with millions in the bank. Senior developers will be mostly obsolete too. I have mentored junior developers and found it to be a rewarding part of the job. My colleagues mostly ignore juniors, provide no real guidance, couldn't care less. I see t…

Depending on corporations to have a moral foundation is a losing bet. It has to come from the outside. Here’s a possible out: Senior engineers stop working huge corporations and use these tools to start their own businesses. (Given today’s hiring situation, this may not even be a choice.) As the business grows, hire junior developers as apprentices to handle day to day tasks while senior engineer works on bigger pict…

So depending on people to do harder work for less pay--that is the winning bet?

Your solution cannot work at scale, because if the small companies you propose succeed, then they will become corporations, which, as you say, cannot be depended upon to do the right thing.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#292

Post by AlexCoventry »

criddell wrote: post #112
johnjwang wrote: post #80

Some engineers on my team at Assembled and I have been a part of the alpha test of Codex, and I'll say it's been quite impressive. We’ve long used local agents like Cursor and Claude Code, so we didn’t expect too much. But Codex shines in a few areas: Parallel task execution: You can batch dozens of small edits (refactors, tests, boilerplate) and run them concurrently without context juggling. It's super nice to run…

If you aren't hiring junior engineers to do these kinds of things, where do you think the senior engineers you need in the future will come from? My kid recently graduated from a very good school with a degree in computer science and what she's told me about the job market is scary. It seems that, relatively speaking, there's a lot of postings for senior engineers and very little for new grads. My employer has hired…

It's worth keeping in mind that we're probably in a recession at the moment, due to US Executive policies which the tech industry largely disagrees with, and over which it has little influence.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#294

Post by LPisGood »

oytis wrote: post #173
criddell wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you aren't hiring junior engineers to do these kinds of things, where do you think the senior engineers you need in the future will come from? My kid recently graduated from a very good school with a degree in computer science and what she's told me about the job market is scary. It seems that, relatively speaking, there's a lot of postings for senior engineers and very little for new grads. My employer has hired…

I guess the industry leaders think we'll not need senior engineers either as capabilities evolve. But also, I think this underestimates significantly what junior engineers do. Junior engineers are people who have spent 4 to 6 years receiving a specialised education in a university - and they normally need to be already good at school math. All they lack is experience applying this education on a job - but they are pr…

> and they normally need to be already good at school math. All they lack is experience applying this education on a job - but they are professionals - educated, proactive and mostly smart.

Without being overly pessimistic, this interpretation is extremely generous.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#295

Post by [deleted] »

rowanG077 wrote: post #278
KaiserPro wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI have shown to most capable in what we consider creative jobs no it creates shit thats close enough for people who are in a rush and dont care. ie, you need artwork for shit on temu, boom job done. You want to make a poster for a bake sale, boom job done. Need some free music that sounds close enough to be swifty, but not enough to get sued, great. But as an expression of creativity, most people cant get it to do…

> AI creates novel algorithms beating thousands of googlers. Random HNer on an AI post one day later > Its currently slightly more configurable clipart. It's so ridiculous at this point that I can just laugh about this.

[deleted]

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#296

Post by CuriouslyC »

dorian-graph wrote: post #188
_bin_ wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bit of a game theory problem. "Training senior engineers" is an expensive and thankless task: you bear essentially all the cost, and most of the total benefit accrues to others as a positive externality. Griping at companies that they should undertake to provide this positive externality isn't really a constructive solution. I think some people are betting on the fact that AI can replace junior devs in 2-5…

This hyper-fixation on replacing engineers in writing code is hilarious, and dangerous, to me. Many people, even in tech companies, have no idea how software is built, maintained, and run. I think instead we should focus on getting rid of managers and product owners.

The people who will come out the other side are domain focused people with the engineering chops to understand the system end to end, and the customer skills to understand what needs to be built.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#297

Post by jgilias »

al_borland wrote: post #262
_bin_ wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I see it, it's actually the only safe bet. Case 1: you keep training engineers. Case 1.1: AGI soon, you don't need juniors or seniors besides a very few. You cost yourself a ton of money that competitors can reinvest into R&D, use to undercut your prices, or return to keep their investors happy. Case 1.2: No AGI. Wages rise, a lot. You must remain in line with that to avoid losing those engineers you trained. Case…

You’re looking at it from the point of view of an individual company. I’m seeing it as a risk for the entire industry. Senior engineers are already very well paid. Wages rising a lot from where they already are, while companies compete for a few people, and those who can’t afford it need to lean on AI or wait 10+ years for someone to develop with equivalent expertise… all of this sounds bad for the industry. It’s onl…

Well, yes. But nobody is running the entire industry. You’re running a company that has competitors willing to eat your lunch.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#298

Post by HideousKojima »

jchanimal wrote: post #191
dorian-graph wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This hyper-fixation on replacing engineers in writing code is hilarious, and dangerous, to me. Many people, even in tech companies, have no idea how software is built, maintained, and run. I think instead we should focus on getting rid of managers and product owners.

The real judge will be survivorship bias and as a betting man, I might think product owners are the ones with the entrepreneurial spirit to make it to the other side.

Product owners and project managers have the soft skills to convince the company that they aren't a drain on its resources regardless of what they actually are.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#299

Post by ofirpress »

Snuggly73 wrote: post #137
ofirpress wrote: post #125

[I'm one of the co-creators of SWE-bench] The team managed to improve on the already very strong o3 results on SWE-bench, but it's interesting that we're just seeing an improvement of a few percentage points. I wonder if getting to 85% from 75% on Verified is going to take as long as it took to get from 20% to 75%.

I can be completely off base, but it feels to me like benchmaxxing is going on with swe-bench. Look at the results from multi swe bench - https://multi-swe-bench.github.io/#/ swe polybench - https://amazon-science.github.io/SWE-PolyBench/ Kotlin bench - https://firebender.com/leaderboard

Not sure what you mean by benchmaxxing but we think there's still a lot of useful signals you can infer from SWE-bench-style benchmarking.

We also have SWE-bench Multimodal which adds a twist I haven't seen elsewhere: https://www.swebench.com/multimodal.html

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#300

Post by andrewmutz »

sam0x17 wrote: post #171
criddell wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you aren't hiring junior engineers to do these kinds of things, where do you think the senior engineers you need in the future will come from? My kid recently graduated from a very good school with a degree in computer science and what she's told me about the job market is scary. It seems that, relatively speaking, there's a lot of postings for senior engineers and very little for new grads. My employer has hired…

Hiring of juniors is basically dead these days and it has been like this for about 10 years and I hate it. I remember when I was a junior in 2014 there were actually startups who would hire cohorts of juniors (like 10 at a time, fresh out of CS degree sort of folks with almost no applied coding experience) and then train them up to senior for a few years, and then a small number will stay and the rest will go elsewhe…

Some of this relates to a culture of job-hopping. It seems uncommon these days to stick around at a company for many years.

If your next hire is only going to stay for 1-2 years, it doesn’t make sense to hire a junior team member and invest in their growth.

Post reply on HN