291–300 of 868 posts
[flagged]
Don't use the site this way. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Customer values are relevant to the discussion given that they impact choice and therefore competition.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been using Codex for software development personally (I have a ChatGPT account), and I use Claude at work (since it is provided by my employer). I find both Codex and Claude Opus perform at a similar level, and in some ways I actually prefer Codex (I keep hitting quota limits in Opus and have to revert back to Sonnet). If your question is related to morality (the thing about US politics, DoD contract and so on).…
They perform at a somewhat equal level on writing single files. But Codex is absolute garbage at theory of self/others. That quickly becomes frustrating. I can tell claude to spawn a new coding agent, and it will understand what that is, what it should be told, and what it can approximately do. Codex on the other hand will spawn an agent and then tell it to continue with the work. It knows a coding agent can do work,…
That's not the experience I have. I had it do more complex changes spawning multiple files and it performed well.
I don't like using multiple agents though. I don't vibe code, I actually review every change it makes. The bottleneck is my review bandwidth, more agents producing more code will not speed me up (in fact it will slow me down, as I'll need to context switch more often).
I’ve officially got model fatigue. I don’t care anymore.
Surprised to see every chart limited to comparisons against other OpenAI models. What does the industry comparison look like?
Anyone else getting artifacts when using this model in Cursor? numerusformassistant to=functions.ReadFile մեկնաբանություն 天天爱彩票网站json {"path":
If you don't want to click in, easy comparison with other 2 frontier models - https://x.com/OpenAI/status/2029620619743219811?s=20
Why do none of the benchmarks test for hallucinations?
Hallucinations are the #1 problem with language models and we are working hard to keep bringing the rate down.
(I work at OpenAI.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please don't post links with tracking parameters (t=jQb...). https://xcancel.com/cperciva/status/2029645027358495156
Haha. This was the second time in like a year that I’ve posted a Twitter link, and the second time someone complained. Okay, I’ll try to remove those before posting, and I’ll edit this one out. Feels like a losing battle, but hey, the audience is usually right.
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/clean-links-qr-code-reader/id6...
[flagged]
Ironically this would actually be a good thing. As we can see from Iran Claude doesn’t quite have these bugs ironed out yet…
The chatbot cannot be held responsible.
Whoever is using chatbots for selecting targets is incompetent and should likely face war crime charges.
The marquee feature is obviously the 1M context window, compared to the ~200k other models support with maybe an extra cost for generations beyond >200k tokens. Per the pricing page, there is no additional cost for tokens beyond 200k: https://openai.com/api/pricing/ Also per pricing, GPT-5.4 ($2.50/M input, $15/M output) is much cheaper than Opus 4.6 ($5/M input, $25/M output) and Opus has a penalty for its beta >200…
There is extra cost for >272K: > For models with a 1.05M context window (GPT-5.4 and GPT-5.4 pro), prompts with >272K input tokens are priced at 2x input and 1.5x output for the full session for standard, batch, and flex. Taken from https://developers.openai.com/api/docs/models/gpt-5.4
Earlier quoted context omitted.
{ tools: [ { name: "nuke", description: "Use when sure.", ... { lat: number, long: number } } ] }
Just remember an ethical programmer would never write a function “bombBagdad”. Rather they would write a function “bombCity(target City)”.