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

431–440 of 487 posts

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#431

Post by brookst »

losvedir wrote: post #174
aorobin wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems likely that they are waiting to release o4 full results until the gpt-5 release later this year, presumably because gpt-5 is bundled with a roughly o4 level reasoning capability, and they want gpt-5 to feel like a significant release.

Do you still think there will be a gpt-5? I thought the consensus was GPT-5 never really panned out and was released with little fanfare as 4.1.

Marketing names aren’t really connected to product generations. We might target v3 of a product for a date and then decide it’s really 2.4, doesn’t mean we won’t market something as v3 later.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#432

Post by Bjorkbat »

bearjaws wrote: post #411

I spend maybe $20 a month on Claude code, $200 a month is hard to swallow. I don't understand why OAI puts their alpha release products under a $200 a month plan instead of just charging for tokens.

My weird theory: the alpha releases are more expensive than people realize, and OpenAI can afford to launch money-losing alphas on Pro because few users have Pro accounts and the lose less money per Pro user.

If anyone could use Codex, you’d want to price the tokens at a rate where you don’t lose money, or at least not too much money. If you price the tokens too high, then not only are people not using Codex, but customers and investors alike begin to lose faith, they no longer “feel the AGI”.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#433

Post by odie5533 »

oytis wrote: post #241
odie5533 wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a dev, if you try taking away my product owners I will fight you. Who am I going to ask for requirements and sign-offs, the CEO?

Your architect, principal engineer etc. (one spot-on job title I've seen is "product architect"), who in turn talks to the senior management. Basically an engineer with a talent and experience for building products rather than a manager with superficial understanding of engineering. I think the most ambitious teams have someone like this on top - or at least around

I've had your type of product owner, but I've also had a product owner that was an ex-staff engineer. Companies should hire ex-engineer product owners, not strictly people-manager product owners.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#434

Post by computerex »

brookst wrote: post #425
lispisok wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I support community developed software and "free as in freedom", "Open Source" got completely perverted into tricking people to work for free for huge financial benefits for others. Your comment is just one example of that. For that reason all my silly little side projects are now in private repos. I dont care the chance somebody builds a business around them is slim to none. Dont think putting a license w…

Protect you from what? What harm is there to you if someone uses some of your code to build a business, as compared to not doing so? How are you worse off? I’ve never understood this mentality. It seems very zero sum and kind of anti social. I’ve built a couple of businesses, and there’s always economic or technical precedent. I honestly don’t mind paying it forward if someone can benefit from side projects I enjoyed…

Exactly. If you are not actively going to compete in that space why not let someone else compete instead using your work?

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#435

Post by virgildotcodes »

roflyear wrote: post #419
crat3r wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the qualifier for this? Didn't one of the models recently create a "novel" algorithm for a math problem? I'm not sure this holds water anymore.

"After a couple of million suggestions and a few dozen repetitions of the overall process" How much of it is brute force?

Are we maybe moving the goalposts here? How much of human creativity is brute force?

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#436

Post by Wowfunhappy »

lispisok wrote: post #192
hintymad wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It looks we are in this interesting cycle: millions of engineers contribute to open-source on github. The best of our minds use the code to develop powerful models to replace exactly these engineers. In fact, the more code a group contributes to github, the easier it is for the companies to replace this group. Case in point, frontend engineers are impacted most so far. Does this mean people will be less incentivized…

As much as I support community developed software and "free as in freedom", "Open Source" got completely perverted into tricking people to work for free for huge financial benefits for others. Your comment is just one example of that. For that reason all my silly little side projects are now in private repos. I dont care the chance somebody builds a business around them is slim to none. Dont think putting a license w…

So let's say your side project improves your life by 5 happiness points. You have two options:

--- OPTION A - Keep your project private.

• You get five happiness points.

--- OPTION B - Make your project public.

• Other individuals may get a small number of happiness points.

• A megacorp might turn your project into a major product without compensating you and get a million happiness points.

• You get five happiness points.

----------

In either scenario, you still end up with five happiness points. If you release your code, other people may get even more happiness points than you, which isn't really fair. But you are no worse off, and you've increased humanity's total wealth of happiness points.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#437

Post by [deleted] »

lurking_swe wrote: post #158
piskov wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What the video: there is an explicit switch at one of the steps about (not) allowing to train on your repo.

That’s nice. And we trust that it does what it says because…? The AI company (openai, anthropic, etc) pinky promised? Have we seen their source code? How do you know they don’t train? Facebook has been caught in recent DOJ hearings breaking the law with how they run their business, just as one example. They claimed under oath, previously, to not be doing X, and then years later there was proof they did exactly that.…

[deleted]

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#438

Post by oytis »

odie5533 wrote: post #433
oytis wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your architect, principal engineer etc. (one spot-on job title I've seen is "product architect"), who in turn talks to the senior management. Basically an engineer with a talent and experience for building products rather than a manager with superficial understanding of engineering. I think the most ambitious teams have someone like this on top - or at least around

I've had your type of product owner, but I've also had a product owner that was an ex-staff engineer. Companies should hire ex-engineer product owners, not strictly people-manager product owners.

Technical background doesn't always help in my experience - it's just a different role. Creating great product requires deep technical expertise to understand where the cutting edge is, vision to understand how it can be expanded and business expertise to understand what makes sense economically. It's just not a manager's job, you can't perform it by collecting customer requirements in a spreadsheet.

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#439

Post by lispisok »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #436
lispisok wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As much as I support community developed software and "free as in freedom", "Open Source" got completely perverted into tricking people to work for free for huge financial benefits for others. Your comment is just one example of that. For that reason all my silly little side projects are now in private repos. I dont care the chance somebody builds a business around them is slim to none. Dont think putting a license w…

So let's say your side project improves your life by 5 happiness points. You have two options: --- OPTION A - Keep your project private. • You get five happiness points. --- OPTION B - Make your project public. • Other individuals may get a small number of happiness points. • A megacorp might turn your project into a major product without compensating you and get a million happiness points. • You get five happiness p…

You really dont see why somebody wouldnt like a megacorp to take their hard work, use it to make a billion dollars, dont see a cent themselves, while struggling to buy a house in this very unaffordable housing market?

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/total-happiness-in-the-world-...

Re: A Research Preview of Codex

#440

Post by Collisteru »

missedthecue wrote: post #342
boshalfoshal wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Higher chance of AGI/most SWEs being out of a job for an extended period of time than the bubble popping imo.

Agree with this. It's so strange to me that out of the all the anti-AI arguments one can derive, the anti-AIers have settled on riding with the "it's useless" argument, when it's plainly one of the most useful tools created since the desktop computer.

These people remind me of the people in the late 19th century who were scared of electricity because they thought it could remove all the air from rooms and suffocate people.
Post reply on HN