Can't help but think the surface area for security issues is becoming massive with these tools
Codex for almost everything
251–260 of 600 posts
Re: Codex for almost everything
#252Codex is HN's darling now because Anthropic lowered rate limits for individuals due to compute constraints. OAI has so few enterprise users they can afford to subsidize compute for this group a lot more than Anthropic. Eventually once they have more users they'll do the same thing as Anthropic, of course. It's all a transparent PR play and it's kind of absurd to see the X/HN crowd fall for it hook, line, and sinker.
There's a systematic marketing campaign from oai on reddit and HN - there's a huge uptick of "codex is better than claude code" comments and posts this last week which is perfectly timed with the claude code increased limits
Go to /r/codex and see how pissed off people are by the new Codex Plus plan 5-hour limits (they're a sliver of what they were a week ago). Whatever OpenAI is doing to market on Reddit isn't working.
Re: Codex for almost everything
#253Codex is HN's darling now because Anthropic lowered rate limits for individuals due to compute constraints. OAI has so few enterprise users they can afford to subsidize compute for this group a lot more than Anthropic. Eventually once they have more users they'll do the same thing as Anthropic, of course. It's all a transparent PR play and it's kind of absurd to see the X/HN crowd fall for it hook, line, and sinker.
Competition is bad? Who cares - let the big players subsidize and compete between each other. That's what we want. We want strong models at a low price, and we'll hype up whoever is doing it. Simultaneously, we also hype up the open models that are catching up. That are significantly more discounted, that also put pressure on the big players and keep them in check. People aren't falling for PR; people are encouraging…
Interesting to see your observation where I have observed the opposite: posts that share big news about open-weight local models have many upvoted comments arguing local models shouldn’t be taken seriously and promoting the SOTA commercial models as the only viable options for serious developers.
Here and on AI tech subreddits (ones that aren’t specifically about local or FOSS) seem to have this dynamic, to the degree I’ve suspected astroturfing.
So it’s refreshing to see maybe that’s just a coincidence or confirmation bias on my end.
Re: Codex for almost everything
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe but the product category is not necessarily a monolith in the same way that Claude Code is. These general purpose tools will have to action across a heterogeneous set of enterprise systems/tools. A runtime environment must be developed to do that but where that of the agent ends and that of the enterprise systems begins is a totally open question.
> Maybe but the product category is not necessarily a monolith in the same way that Claude Code is. These general purpose tools will have to action across a heterogeneous set of enterprise systems/tools. What would make it not be a monolith? To me it seems like there'll be a big advantage (e.g. in distribution, user understanding) for most people to be using the same product / similar interface. And then the agent an…
I mean there is a runtime layer that needs to be developed, and some of it may live in CC/Codex and some might live in the various enterprise systems. Someworkflow automations and some amount of the semantic layer may for instance exist in your CRM/ERP/data platform. Yes the front-end would be owned by the chat interface, but part of the solution may exist in the various enterprise systems. This would be closer to a distributed system than a monolith. The demos and marketing language point to this as the direction of travel (i.e. the reference to Atlassian Rovo, etc.).
Re: Codex for almost everything
#255Do people really want codex to have control over their computer and apps? I'm still paranoid about keeping things securely sandboxed.
It repaired an astonishing messed up permission issue on my mac
I did some work on an agent that was supposed to demonstrate a learning pipeline. I figured having it fix broken linux servers with some contrived failures would make for a good example if it getting stuck, having to get some assistance to progress, and then having a better capability for handling that class of failure in the future.
I couldn't come up with a single failure mode the agent with a gpt5.x model behind it couldn't one shot. I created socket overruns.. dangling file descriptors.. badly configured systemd units.. busted route tables.. "failed" volume mounts..
Had to start creating failures of internal services the models couldn't have been trained on and it was still hard to have scenarios it couldn't one shot.
Re: Codex for almost everything
#256Just reading the comments here it's amazing how many people seemingly don't know that Claude Desktop and Cowork basically already does all of this. Codex isn't pioneering these features, it's mostly just catching up.
IMHO no one is really pioneering. A lot more is possible than what is being done. I wrote a blog post about useful agents in a business setting ( https://www.generativestorytelling.ai/blog/posts/useful-corp... ) that highlights AI being proactive. I mean table stakes stuff, why isn't an agent going through all my slack channels and giving me a morning summary of what I should be paying attention to? Why aren't all th…
Disclaimer I work at Zapier, but we're doing a ton of this. I have an agent that runs every morning and creates prep documents for my calls. Then a separate one that runs at the end of every week to give me feedback
Re: Codex for almost everything
#257Codex is HN's darling now because Anthropic lowered rate limits for individuals due to compute constraints. OAI has so few enterprise users they can afford to subsidize compute for this group a lot more than Anthropic. Eventually once they have more users they'll do the same thing as Anthropic, of course. It's all a transparent PR play and it's kind of absurd to see the X/HN crowd fall for it hook, line, and sinker.
There's a systematic marketing campaign from oai on reddit and HN - there's a huge uptick of "codex is better than claude code" comments and posts this last week which is perfectly timed with the claude code increased limits
Thing is, Codex 5.3 is a better and more consistent model than anything Anthropic have come out with. It can deal with larger codebases, has compaction that works, and has much less of a tendency to resort to sycophantic hallucination as it runs out of ideas. I also appreciate their approach to third party harnesses like opencode, which is obviously the complete opposite to Anthropic and their scramble to keep their crumbling garden walls upright.
Which makes it even more of a shame that Sam Altman is such a psychopathic jackass.
Re: Codex for almost everything
#258Codex is HN's darling now because Anthropic lowered rate limits for individuals due to compute constraints. OAI has so few enterprise users they can afford to subsidize compute for this group a lot more than Anthropic. Eventually once they have more users they'll do the same thing as Anthropic, of course. It's all a transparent PR play and it's kind of absurd to see the X/HN crowd fall for it hook, line, and sinker.
Competition is bad? Who cares - let the big players subsidize and compete between each other. That's what we want. We want strong models at a low price, and we'll hype up whoever is doing it. Simultaneously, we also hype up the open models that are catching up. That are significantly more discounted, that also put pressure on the big players and keep them in check. People aren't falling for PR; people are encouraging…
Big players subsidizing is what kills medium and small players which then kills competition. What follows is monopoly.
Big players operating at loss to distort the market is not a good thing overall.
Re: Codex for almost everything
#259Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think Claude has this part yet: > With background computer use, Codex can now use all of the apps on your computer by seeing, clicking, and typing with its own cursor. Multiple agents can work on your Mac in parallel, without interfering with your own work in other apps.
>background computer use How does that even work technically? macOS doesn't support multiple cursors. On native Cocoa apps you can pass input to a window without raising via command+click so possibly they synthesized those events, but fewer and fewer apps support that these days. And AppleScript is basically dead, so they can't be using that either. I also read they acquired the Sky team (who I think were former Appl…
Probably accessibility APIs
Re: Codex for almost everything
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
IMHO no one is really pioneering. A lot more is possible than what is being done. I wrote a blog post about useful agents in a business setting ( https://www.generativestorytelling.ai/blog/posts/useful-corp... ) that highlights AI being proactive. I mean table stakes stuff, why isn't an agent going through all my slack channels and giving me a morning summary of what I should be paying attention to? Why aren't all th…
Disclaimer I work at Zapier, but we're doing a ton of this. I have an agent that runs every morning and creates prep documents for my calls. Then a separate one that runs at the end of every week to give me feedback
In the full blog post I actually go into more detail about automatically creating a knowledge graph of what is being worked on throughout the whole company. There are some really powerful transformative efforts that can be accomplished right now, but that no one is doing.
Basic things like detecting common pain points, to automatically figuring out who is the SME for a topic. AIs are really good at categorizations and tagging, heck even before modern LLMs this is something ML could do.
But instead we have AI driven code reviews.
Code Reviews are rarely the blocker for productivity! As an industry, we need to stop automating the easy stuff and start helping people accomplish the hard stuff!