Live data from Hacker News

GPT-5.3-Codex

openai.com

361–370 of 634 posts

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the 1930s, when electronic calculators were first introduced, there was a widespread belief that accounting as a career was finished. Instead, the opposite became true. Accounting as a profession grew, becoming far more analytical/strategic than it had been previously. You are correct that these models primarily address problems that have already been solved. However, that has always been the case for the majority…

The story you're describing doesn't seem much better than one could get from googling around and going on stackoverflow

I think the 'better than googling' part is less about the final code and more about the friction.

For example, consider this game: The game creates a target that's randomly generated on the screen and have a player at the middle of the screen that needs to hit the target. When a key is pressed, the player swings a rope attached to a metal ball in circles above it's head, at a certain rotational velocity. Upon key release, the player has to let go of the rope and the ball travels tangentially from the point of release. Each time you hit the target you score.

Now, I’m trying to calculate the tangential velocity of a projectile from a circular path, I could find the trig formulas on Stack Overflow. But with an LLM, I can describe the 'vibe' of the game mechanic and get the math scaffolded in seconds.

It's that shift from searching for syntax to architecting the logic that feels like the real win.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#362
post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Someone you know has an AI boyfriend MyBoyfriendIsAI is a thing > Generalist agent AIs that can function as a personal secretary Isn't that what MoltBot/OpenClaw is all about? So far these look like successful predictions.

Moltbot is an attempt to do that. Would you hire it as a personal secretary and entrust all your personal data to it?

Only people who haven't had a secretary would think it's a personal secretary.

Like, it can't even answer the phone.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#364
post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GPT 5.2 codex plans well but fucks off a lot, goes in circles (more than opus 4.5) and really just lacks the breadth of integrated knowledge that makes opus feel so powerful. Opus is the first model I can trust to just do things, and do them right, at least small things. For larger/more complex things I have to keep either model on extremely short leashes. But the difference is enough that I canceled my GPT Pro sub s…

I always use 5.2-Codex-High or 5.2-Codex-Extra High (in Cursor). The regular version is probably too dumb.

Didn't make a difference for me. Though I will say, so far 4.6 is really pissing me off and I might downgrade back to 4.5. It just refuses to listen to what I say, the steering is awful.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm personally 100% convinced of the opposite, that it's a waste of time to steer them. we know now that agentic loops can converge given the proper framing and self-reflectiveness tools.

Converge towards what though... I think the level of testing/verification you need to have an LLM output a non-trivial feature (e.g. Paxos/anything with concurrency, business logic that isn't just "fetch value from spreadsheet, add to another number and save to the database") is pretty high.

in the new world, engineers have to actually be good at capturing and interpreting requirements

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#366
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The labs have fully embraced the cutthroat competition, the arms race has fully shed the civilized facade of beneficient mutual cooperation. Dirty tricks and underhanded tactics will happen - I think Demis isn't savvy in this domain, but might end up stomping out the competition on pure performance. Elon, Sam, and Dario know how to fight ugly and do the nasty political boardroom crap. 26 is gonna be a very dramatic y…

>civilized facade of mutual cooperation >Dirty tricks and underhanded tactics As long the tactics are legal ( i.e. not corporate espionage, bribes etc), the no holds barred full free market competition is the best thing for the market and the consumers.

Yes, but not cutthroat competition that implies unsustainable, detrimental competition that kills off the industry.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#367

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.

If I'm not mistaken Codex is free until April 2nd with the previous generous rate limits (while paying customers get 2x).

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#368

According to Sam Altman, Anthropic is for "rich people." Judging by his $4 million man-baby Koeniggsegg, he must be a huge Claude Code user!

He would be! If they didn't get banned from using it in the OAI offices. He's so mad.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#369

I'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…

I only switched to using the terminal based agents in the last week. Prior to this I was pretty much only using it through Cursor and GH Copilot. The Anthropic models when used through GH Copilot were far superior to the codex ones and I didn't really get the hype of Codex. Using them through the CLI though, Codex is much better, IMO. My guess is that it's potentially that and just momentum from developers who starte…

Out of curiosity, what do you feel are the key differences between cursor + models versus something like Claude Code/Codex?

Are you feeling the benefits of the switch? What prompted you to change?

I've been running cursor with my own workflows (where planning is definitely a key step) and it's been great. However, the feeling of missing out, coupled with the fact I am a paying ChatGPT customer, got me to try codex. It hasn't really clicked in what way this is better, as so far it really hasn't been.

I have this feeling that supposedly you can give these tools a bit more of a hands-off approach so maybe I just haven't really done that yet. Haven't fiddled with worktrees or anything else yet either.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#370
post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> With Codex (5.3), the framing is an interactive collaborator: you steer it mid-execution, stay in the loop, course-correct as it works. > With Opus 4.6, the emphasis is the opposite: a more autonomous, agentic, thoughtful system that plans deeply, runs longer, and asks less of the human. Ain't the UX is the exact opposite? Codex thinks much longer before gives you back the answer.

Codex now lets you tell the LLM tgings in the middle of its thinking without interrupting it, so you can read the thinking traces and tell it to change course if it's going off track.

That just seems like a UI difference. I've always interrupted claude code added a comment and it's continued without much issue. Otherwise if you just type the message is queued for next. There's no real reason to prefer one over the other except it sounds like codex can't queue messages?
Post reply on HN