Do software engineers here feel threatened by this? I certainly am. I'm surprised that this topic is almost entirely missing in these threads.
theres alot of denial, and people that havent taken a serious look at the ai models
GPT-5.3-Codex
311–320 of 634 posts
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#312When 2 multi billion giants advertise same day, it is not competition but rather a sign of struggle and survival. With all the power of the "best artificial intelligence" at your disposition, and a lot of capital also all the brilliant minds, THIS IS WHAT YOU COULD COME UP WITH? Interesting
What's funny is that most of this "progress" is new datasets + post-training shaping the model's behavior (instruction + preference tuning). There is no moat besides that.
> is new datasets + post-training shaping the model's behavior (instruction + preference tuning). There is no moat besides that.
sure, but acquiring/generating/creating/curating so much high quality data is still significant moat.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#313I've always been fascinated to see significantly more people talking about using Claude than I see people talking about Codex. I know that's anecdotal, but it just seems Claude is often the default. I'm sure there are key differences in how they handle coding tasks and maybe Claude is even a little better in some areas. However, the note I see the most from Claude users is running out of usage. Coding differences asi…
> the note I see the most from Claude users is running out of usage.
I suspect that tells us less about model capability/efficiency and more about each company's current need to paint a specific picture for investors re: revenue, operating costs, capital requirements, cash on hand, growth rate, retention, margins etc. And those needs can change at any moment.
Use whatever works best for your particular needs today, but expect the relative performance and value between leaders to shift frequently.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#314Earlier 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
I wish I could agree with you, but as a game dev, shader author, and occasional asm hacker, I still think AIs have demonstrated being perfectly capable of copying "those effects". It's been trained on them, of course.
You're not gonna one-shot RD2, but neither will a human. You can one-shot particles and shader passes though.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#315Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Do we still think we'll have soft take off? There's still no evidence we'll have any take off. At least in the "Foom!" sense of LLMs independently improving themselves iteratively to substantial new levels being reliably sustained over many generations. To be clear, I think LLMs are valuable and will continue to significantly improve. But self-sustaining runaway positive feedback loops delivering exponential improv…
Yes, but also you'll never have any early evidence of the Foom until the Foom itself happens.
If only General Relativity had such an ironclad defense of being as unfalsifiable as Foom Hypothesis is. We could’ve avoided all of the quantum physics nonsense.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#316Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? People can easily get assets, thats not a even a problem in 2026. Roller coaster tycoon's assets were done by the programmer himself. If its so easy why haven't we seen actually complex pieces of software done in couple of weeks by LLM users? Also try building any complex effects by prompting LLMs, you wont get any far, this is why all of the LLM coded websites look stupidly bland.
Not sure what you're confused about, I never said assets were hard to get, I just said that the LLM needs to be provided a folder of the assets for it to make use of them, it's not going to create them from scratch (at least not without great difficulty, because LLMs are capable of using and coding Three.js for example). I don't know the answer to your first question because I don't hang around in the 3D or game dev…
you have shown me 0 examples, I showed actual examples to the given question. Your answers have just been "AI can also do this" but gave no actual proof.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#317Do software engineers here feel threatened by this? I certainly am. I'm surprised that this topic is almost entirely missing in these threads.
No. AI does not work well enough, you still need a person to look on it and CODE. It probably never will, until AGI which probably also in my opinion will never come.
It's a super-special AI tier that can replace developers and other grunts, yet somehow cannot replace managers and C-suite.
It can only replace whoever is not writing a fat cheque to it.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#318Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just curious is this a manual process or you guys have automated these steps?
I have a `codex-review` skill with a shell script that uses the Codex CLI with a prompt. It tells Claude to use Codex as a review partner and to push back if it disagrees. They will go through 3 or 4 back-and-forth iterations some times before they find consensus. It's not perfect, but it does help because Claude will point out the things Codex found and give it credit.
Mind sharing the skill/prompt?
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#319Both Opus 4.6 and GPT-5.3 one shot a Gameboy emulator for me. Guess I need a better benchmark.
There's hundreds of gameboy emulators available on Github they've been trained on. It's quite literally the simplest piece of emulation you could do. The fact that they couldn't do it before is an indictment of how shit they were, but a gameboy emulator should be a weekend project for anyone even ever so slightly qualified. Your benchmark was awful to begin with.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#320Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
I wish I could agree with you, but as a game dev, shader author, and occasional asm hacker, I still think AIs have demonstrated being perfectly capable of copying "those effects". It's been trained on them, of course. You're not gonna one-shot RD2, but neither will a human. You can one-shot particles and shader passes though.
I didnt say one shot it, coding agents have been out for more than couple years and yet we cant point to single Good piece of software built by it.