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

Understanding ChatGPT Work

simonwillison.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 216 posts

Re: Understanding ChatGPT Work

#101

Post by matsemann »

safety1st wrote: post #64
tristanj wrote: post #4

I think most people are sleeping on the ChatGPT Work/Codex computer use feature. It's incredibly useful. I can remote in from the app, voice it instructions, then let it work in the background. When I tell it "draft a reply to this email (which it has access to thru the gmail connector) and attach the latest docs" or "fill out this multistep immigration electronic travel authorisation form using my passport files sav…

Using Work/Codex I'm continually amazed at how far my experience is from the popular AI memes like "this will destroy all jobs" and "AI is useless and is about to crash and take the economy with it." My experience feels like I'm in an Iron Man movie. I get up in the morning, I turn on the voice chat mode, and while I'm making my coffee I ask it to highlight any important emails I received overnight. I then babble to…

Not to come across as dismissive of your job, but if a "day's worth of email" can be done in 20 minutes now, it to me mostly highlights that it was mostly busy-work with little value and could have had another process? Good that AI improved upon the old process, though.

Re: Understanding ChatGPT Work

#102

Post by FailMore »

I am unsure the direction that AI assisted work will go in. I am opinionated and building something in the space. In this reply I discuss my view + what I have been building.

My opinion is: We now have AI, this new amazing flexible tool. We can throw it at any problem. But in terms of document creation we have a choice between old fashioned siloed document formats (.pptx, .pdf, .xlsx, .docx, etc.) and a freshly rendered - slightly randomly styled - html site with some basic javascript within it. I think these combinations are odd and do not maximise the powers of AI.

I've been building something called SmallDocs [0][1] which is a new take on work documents. It's all Markdown, but it always renders (100% privately) on the SmallDocs site. This means the SmallDocs renderer can convert recognised Markdown combinations into powerful traditional document formats [2]. For example, we convert a ```cells block into an in-line spreadsheet you can export to Excel.

This gives an agent the ability to express itself with a great deal of depth and flexibility. For example, your agent can produce a single data analysis "SmallDoc" with text, charts, spreadsheets, etc. [3] I find that combining formats quickens the speed I can understand a topic.

I also believe a pre-determined rendering engine has a lot of advantages over a freslhy built HTML artifact. It allows you to build in lot's of useful defaults that the agent doesn't have to code from scratch. These can be small things, for example, every time your agent renders a Markdown table in SmallDocs you can instantly copy it as a CSV or a PNG. And these can be bigger things, such as a rich slides DSL with solid styling defaults, which saves your agents a lot of tokens and results in consistently attractive HTML slides [4]. (Slides can also be automatically exported to .pdf and .pptx.)

I've been at it for a few months, and am still working on the project. I am looking for feedback and open source collaborators. Thanks for reading!

[0] https://smalldocs.org

[1] https://github.com/espressoplease/smalldocs

[2] https://smalldocs.org/blogs/what-is-a-smalldoc

[3] https://smalldocs.org/s/46fWiAyF77T9c7tqYwAQqp#k=j78ZEOOrgo8...

[4] https://smalldocs.org/s/QrmeWMsULGS871nXQYOacB#k=ubOHH9QtTWp...

(And something totally different, your agent can also use SmallDocs to walk you through code files: https://smalldocs.org/s/JsI_-tWSH0UpSd_YXxVLPm#k=G5jLCYA4JUX...)

Re: Understanding ChatGPT Work

#103

Post by matsemann »

simonw wrote: post #23

I just updated the article to link to this site: https://codex-tool-reference.simonw.chatgpt.site/ Which I created using this prompt in a fresh Work session: > Build a site that lists every one of your tools - nearly grouped into categories - and for each one explain what it does. Try to exactly duplicate arguments and tool descriptions where possible. Design aesthetic should be technical docs, minimal flare UPDATE:…

Honest question: why would I ever visit that site? It's just an insane amount of text. Not written or curated by you. Any need for me for this data would be fulfilled by just asking the agent myself, and with pointed questions it could float better what I need than this vomit of data?

Re: Understanding ChatGPT Work

#104

Post by gf000 »

FinnKuhn wrote: post #92
tristanj wrote: post #4

I think most people are sleeping on the ChatGPT Work/Codex computer use feature. It's incredibly useful. I can remote in from the app, voice it instructions, then let it work in the background. When I tell it "draft a reply to this email (which it has access to thru the gmail connector) and attach the latest docs" or "fill out this multistep immigration electronic travel authorisation form using my passport files sav…

I feel like at least some of this is inspired by OpenClaw or at least driven by Peter Steinberger, as these benefits and ideas sound very similar as what he described his work in a few interviews before these features existed in ChatGPT Work.

I mean, it's all just tool calls and context-management in the end. Like it is pretty self-evident to have a "heartbeat" and to do specific stuff on a schedule, etc.

Re: Understanding ChatGPT Work

#105

Post by embedding-shape »

_zoltan_ wrote: post #96
embedding-shape wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's it bit slow since I'm not paying extra for ultrafast mode Contrary to its name, "ultrafast" isn't faster than the rest, and many times slower than "max", as it'll "fork out" to a bunch of sub-agents and wait for them, + does extra "red-teaming" and more. I think "ultrafast" is not referring to the speed of the "model" (harness in reality, as it's all the same model as "max") but rather how fast it consumes you…

He isn't talking about ultra mode which you are. He said "ultrafast" which has nothing to do with subagents. It's a new API tier where it runs on a different inference backend to get you faster token/s.

Huh, yeah, it's not just a portmanteau of "fast" mode + "ultra" reasoning but something completely different, you're right: https://openai.com/index/previewing-ultrafast/

OpenAI really is the worst at naming stuff.

Re: Understanding ChatGPT Work

#106

Post by digital_voodoo »

tristanj wrote: post #4

I think most people are sleeping on the ChatGPT Work/Codex computer use feature. It's incredibly useful. I can remote in from the app, voice it instructions, then let it work in the background. When I tell it "draft a reply to this email (which it has access to thru the gmail connector) and attach the latest docs" or "fill out this multistep immigration electronic travel authorisation form using my passport files sav…

> I think most people are sleeping on the ChatGPT Work/Codex computer use feature.

One of the root causes most people are "sleeping", is most probably why we're here now: the feature is marketed in such a confusing way to the general public, that it takes a post on a personal blog to actually explain it.

ChatGPT has been suggesting Work in the middle of some intense working sessions. Finally, I took some spare 30mn to research exactly this on ChatGPT, no later than this weekend: what does Work have that Chat doesn't have?

It should be simple enough for someone using it for work. They say it's great, and I still need to set time aside (from my real work) to research how great it is?

Re: Understanding ChatGPT Work

#107

Post by latexr »

matsemann wrote: post #101
safety1st wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using Work/Codex I'm continually amazed at how far my experience is from the popular AI memes like "this will destroy all jobs" and "AI is useless and is about to crash and take the economy with it." My experience feels like I'm in an Iron Man movie. I get up in the morning, I turn on the voice chat mode, and while I'm making my coffee I ask it to highlight any important emails I received overnight. I then babble to…

Not to come across as dismissive of your job, but if a "day's worth of email" can be done in 20 minutes now, it to me mostly highlights that it was mostly busy-work with little value and could have had another process? Good that AI improved upon the old process, though.

Assuming your first sentence is accurate, I would disagree with the second. Making a bad process more efficient is a negative, not a positive, we should instead strive to improve the situation. The correct way to handle “busy-work with little value” should be to understand what lead to that point, fix it, then eliminate what’s unnecessary, not spend more resources (money, time, sanity) on making useless work be done faster. That still wastes resources and stresses the system, which makes it worse by hiding problems that will bite you in the future.

For example, say you deal with 100 emails a day. 90 of those are pointless busy-work and 10 are meaningful. It takes you all day. Now you begin using an LLM. You still have to separate the 90 from the 10 but then have the LLM reply with the 90 and leave the 10 for yourself because they are important and you have to make sure they’re done right. It now takes you a fraction of the day, so what happens is you start taking on more and more email¹. You’re now at 300 a day, with 270 busy-work and 30 meaningful (same ratio as before). Then one day your LLM breaks (ran out of tokens; a model was retired; bad connection; your powerful local machine broke down) and now you’re flooded by email and don’t even have time to separate the bad from the good, let alone prioritise and reply. If you had instead fixed the busy-work problem, you’d have been fine.

¹ Let’s be real: Work expands to fill the allotted time (Parkinson's Law). Those selling increases in productivity always promise more free time but what always happens is more work.

Re: Understanding ChatGPT Work

#108

Post by ExtremisAndy »

ozgung wrote: post #98
tristanj wrote: post #4

I think most people are sleeping on the ChatGPT Work/Codex computer use feature. It's incredibly useful. I can remote in from the app, voice it instructions, then let it work in the background. When I tell it "draft a reply to this email (which it has access to thru the gmail connector) and attach the latest docs" or "fill out this multistep immigration electronic travel authorisation form using my passport files sav…

I think the whole world is sleeping on the privacy/security implications of this technology. Recent OpenAI/HuggingFace incident shows us that even in a very controlled top AI-lab setting, humans can't know what agents are really doing. In our consumer environments at home or work we don't even have access to reasoning logs or background agents/tools. What they do gets more opaque and convoluted every day. When I gran…

Yes. Don’t get me wrong: I use and enjoy these LLMs. But even now, well into 2026, I’m still using them via the now “old-fashioned” chat box in a web browser. Based on all that we’ve learned about this technology, there’s just no way I’m giving it control over any part of my machine. Is it a helpful search engine? Does it save me typing and write some nice code snippets when I need it to? Absolutely it does, and I greatly appreciate the technology. But I’m just not ready to create agents and let them run. I just think that’s still way too risky, and I fear a major, major catastrophe is coming because of how so many people recklessly trust these agents. I certainly hope I’m wrong.

Re: Understanding ChatGPT Work

#109

Post by rvz »

4747474747 wrote: post #53
minimaxir wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Occam's Razor would suggest that's because Simon posts good content. You can check his domain history to confirm that not everything Simon posts gets upvoted. https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=simonwillison.net

occams razor says this parasite gets support from YC for these circucular promotion schemes with the companies he writes about

Almost, but not quite. I would say "protected" accounts and domain names by well known YC folks are "allowed" to do this on this site.

If is anyone else, then they get themselves banned.

Re: Understanding ChatGPT Work

#110

Post by nullmatrix »

ghilston wrote: post #71
safety1st wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using Work/Codex I'm continually amazed at how far my experience is from the popular AI memes like "this will destroy all jobs" and "AI is useless and is about to crash and take the economy with it." My experience feels like I'm in an Iron Man movie. I get up in the morning, I turn on the voice chat mode, and while I'm making my coffee I ask it to highlight any important emails I received overnight. I then babble to…

As someone who hasn't used Work or Codex but has used Claude Code and Pi a lot, may you describe how to set this up? I'm interested enough to try this out

You'll need a subscription ($20 tier should be fine) and then need to add "connectors" to your services (Gmail, 365, etc) so that it can access them. Then you just use the Claude Cowork (Or ChatGPT equivalent) tabs and chat with it.
Post reply on HN