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

GPT-5.3-Codex

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 634 posts

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#241

Post by suddenlybananas »

beernet wrote: post #181
nananana9 wrote: post #173

I've been listening to the insane 100x productivity gains you all are getting with AI and "this new crazy model is a real game changer" for a few years now, I think it's about time I asked: Can you guys point me ton a single useful, majority LLM-written, preferably reliable, program that solves a non-trivial problem that hasn't been solved before a bunch of times in publicly available code?

Can you point me to a human written program an LLM cannot write? And no, just answering with a massively large codebase does not count because this issue is temporary. Some people just hate progress.

And some people clearly hate humans.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#242

Post by ghosty141 »

stri8ted wrote: post #200
aurareturn wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because Claude Code is stealing the thunder so OpenAI is focusing on coding now.

That is where the money is.

This. I think software development is the best usecase for AI yet. I use it almost daily at work and it's a huge help.

Enterprise customers will happily pay even 100$/mo subscriptions and it has a clear value proposition that can be decently verified.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#243

Post by svantana »

beernet wrote: post #181
nananana9 wrote: post #173

I've been listening to the insane 100x productivity gains you all are getting with AI and "this new crazy model is a real game changer" for a few years now, I think it's about time I asked: Can you guys point me ton a single useful, majority LLM-written, preferably reliable, program that solves a non-trivial problem that hasn't been solved before a bunch of times in publicly available code?

Can you point me to a human written program an LLM cannot write? And no, just answering with a massively large codebase does not count because this issue is temporary. Some people just hate progress.

Pretty much any software that people pay for? If LLMs could clone an app, why would anyone still pay good money for the original?

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#244

Post by koolala »

I want to recompile a Rust project to be f32 instead of f64.

Am I better off buying 1 month of Codex, Claude, or Antigravity?

I want to have the agent continuesly recompile and fix compile errors on loop until all the bugs from switching to f32 are gone.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#245

Post by nopinsight »

karmasimida wrote: post #166

For those who cared: GPT-5.3-Codex dominates terminal coding with a roughly 12% lead (Terminal-Bench 2.0), while Opus 4.6 retains the edge in general computer use by 8% (OSWorld). Anyone knows the difference between OSWorld vs OSWorld Verified?

From Claude 4.6 Thinking:

OSWorld is the full 369-task benchmark. OSWorld Verified is a ~200-task subset where humans have confirmed the eval scripts reliably score success/failure — the full set has some noisy grading where correct actions can still get marked wrong.

Scores on Verified tend to run higher, so they're not directly comparable.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#246

Post by satvikpendem »

falloutx wrote: post #217
beernet wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you point me to a human written program an LLM cannot write? And no, just answering with a massively large codebase does not count because this issue is temporary. Some people just hate progress.

Even a normal website like landonorris.com. Try copying all those effects with AI. Another example: Red Dead Redemption 2 Another one: Roller coaster tycoon Another one: ShaderToy

Why do you believe an LLM can't write these, just because they're 3D? If the assets are given (just as with a human game programmer, who has artists provide them the assets), then an LLM can write the code just the same.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#247

Post by reducesuffering »

mirsadm wrote: post #155
reducesuffering wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This has already been going on for years. It's just that they were using GPT 4.5 to work on GPT 5. All this announcement mean is that they're confident enough in early GPT 5.3 model output to further refine GPT 5.3 based on initial 5.3. But yes, takeoff will still happen because of this recursive self improvement works, it's just that we're already past the inception point.

I can't tell if this is a serious conversation anymore.

“Best start believing in science fiction stories. You're in one.”

https://x.com/TheZvi/status/2017310187309113781

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#248

Post by cheeze »

nubg wrote: post #239
dawidg81 wrote: post #120

May AI not write the code for me. May I at least understand what it has "written". AI help is good but don't replace real programmers completely. I'm enough copy pasting code i don't understand. What if one day AI will fall down and there will be no real programmers to write the software. AI for help is good but I don't want AI to write whole files into my project. Then something may broke and I won't know what's bro…

Sorry but companies will not hire you but instead a person who learned how to code with AI. Get with the times or lose.

It's that Austin Powers clip of the guy slowly getting smooshed by the steam roller.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#249

Post by EmilStenstrom »

koolala wrote: post #244

I want to recompile a Rust project to be f32 instead of f64. Am I better off buying 1 month of Codex, Claude, or Antigravity? I want to have the agent continuesly recompile and fix compile errors on loop until all the bugs from switching to f32 are gone.

Doesn't matter which one. All of them can do things like this now, given a good enough feedback loop. Which your problem has.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#250

Post by dawidg81 »

katspaugh wrote: post #124
dawidg81 wrote: post #120

May AI not write the code for me. May I at least understand what it has "written". AI help is good but don't replace real programmers completely. I'm enough copy pasting code i don't understand. What if one day AI will fall down and there will be no real programmers to write the software. AI for help is good but I don't want AI to write whole files into my project. Then something may broke and I won't know what's bro…

Honest question: have you tried evolving your code architecture when adding features instead of just "promting more and more things"?

I've tried that too but it was almost the same, chatgpt kept forgetting many things about the code and project structure. In summary AI can get problematic for me and i get with troubles with it. This is like one of the reasons why I still prefer traditional text editor for writing code like Vim over a "software on steroids" like VS Code and things like that...
Post reply on HN