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

Codex-maxxing

jxnl.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 90 posts

Re: Codex-maxxing

#41

Post by 59nadir »

wahnfrieden wrote: post #30
esperent wrote: post #7

> Every 30 minutes, check Slack and Gmail for unanswered messages that need my attention... > When I come back to Slack, replies are often already sitting in drafts. I still decide what gets sent, but the expensive part of gathering context is done. This just feels so dystopian to me. I hope that I never work with you or someone else doing this. I personally do use LLMs for work messaging but I'm extremely careful to…

An interesting piece of context with this guy is he writes about a serious hand injury that prevents him from typing much anymore. He says that adopting LLM workflows saved his hands (beyond just dictating everything).

I lost about 50% functionality in my hands in 2018-2019 and couldn't type more than an hour or so per day, what really saved me was dictation via Dragon NaturallySpeaking, and for coding I used dragonfly to create programming grammars. I'm happy for this guy for finding a solution but LLMs (in this shape) were late to the party.

Re: Codex-maxxing

#42

Post by nubg »

> When I come back to Slack, replies are often already sitting in drafts.

He must be a pleasure to work with

Re: Codex-maxxing

#43

Post by asdff »

isoprophlex wrote: post #16
grebc wrote: post #11

All the AI stuff lately is just like Unix Porn reddit but posted to places where the people don’t care about it.

I feel that we're about ready for someone to start something like Uber, but for file-like objects

"Rsync as a service with surge pricing" now where do I sign my series A?

Re: Codex-maxxing

#44

Post by nubg »

villgax wrote: post #21
4k0hz wrote: post #9

The author of this post works at OpenAI on the Codex team.

same author who's idea of constraint decoding for structured outputs was to run an schema-begging-API call in a loop 10 times & then throw an exception on failure.

source?

Re: Codex-maxxing

#45

Post by AgentMatt »

skiing_crawling wrote: post #27

Is this LLM psychosis? So much tending and conversing with the matmuls but what was the outcome? Are people who get this into it more successful somehow? It reminds me of people who take drugs and get "revelations" but then are not particularly over represented in the group of successful people for all of their deep insights.

> It reminds me of people who take drugs and get "revelations" but then are not particularly over represented in the group of successful people for all of their deep insights.

This depends on where you're looking for "successful" people.

I generally agree with you - of those people who might report "revelations" through hallucinogenic drugs, the majority may misinterpret their drug-induced experience and hence be more confused / lost than before.

On the other hand, it can still be true that among those who eventually do have genuine spiritual insight, having used hallucinogenic substances is overrepresented compared to the general population.

Quoting from [1], where the author tried to find spiritually advanced individuals:

> Approximately 52% of participants had used hallucinogenic drugs at some point; none reported these as the trigger that led to PNSE.

PNSE = Persistent Non-Symbolic Experience.

My point is: while there are certainly people who go way overboard with the LLM stuff, that is not at odds with skillful use of LLMs being overrepresented in successful people.

I see now that you didn't make that point, but I already typed this all out and I'm gonna leave it.

[1] https://digitalcommons.ciis.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=...

Re: Codex-maxxing

#46

Post by ssl-3 »

watwut wrote: post #25
lucianbr wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the other people in the org are using LLMs to a similar degree, any question to which an LLM can provide a good answer to will never get sent. How useful are the draft replies then?

You pretend that you did the work. It is not about achieving the result, it is about appearing productive.

^^^ this guy productivity-maxxes

But seriously: It's a game. If that kind of "productivity" is seen as a positive measure of their worth, then in this game they're rewarded for optimizing it.

And the game is simply fucked up.

And that's not new. Ye olde corpo rat race has always often revolved not around maximizing the things that are useful, but instead around maximizing the things that the boss-man perceives to be valuable.

Here in 2026, if the boss-man is himself boss-maxxing by using a bot to evaluate performance, this kind of automated charade would probably work very well. Champagne would fall from the heavens. Doors would open. Velvet ropes would part.

This game is quite clearly not sustainable and must ultimately collapse, but it's still a game with winners and losers. Historically, lots of unsustainable games have left winners standing around when the the games ultimately collapses.

(And, to be frank: It's perfectly OK to hate the game. It's also OK to hate the players and the mediators.)

Re: Codex-maxxing

#47

Post by BoredPositron »

sph wrote: post #26
grebc wrote: post #11

All the AI stuff lately is just like Unix Porn reddit but posted to places where the people don’t care about it.

Hacker News is the /r/unixporn equivalent for AI. Ground zero. They all are here. The further away you go, the more sensible takes you find.

It's LinkedIn. HN is just for the cosplayers.

Re: Codex-maxxing

#48

Post by skiing_crawling »

Amekedl wrote: post #37
skiing_crawling wrote: post #27

Is this LLM psychosis? So much tending and conversing with the matmuls but what was the outcome? Are people who get this into it more successful somehow? It reminds me of people who take drugs and get "revelations" but then are not particularly over represented in the group of successful people for all of their deep insights.

You are absolutely right! Kidding, but the analogy sits comfortably with me. I wonder though if this kind of behavior is potentially harmful, most likely less than drugs but nonetheless...

triggered me with that first sentence

Re: Codex-maxxing

#49

Post by dreadnip »

CSMastermind wrote: post #5
parf02 wrote: post #3

Most people I know underutilize voice mode. Such a game changer for making brain dumps the LLM can just gobble up

Still not useful enough for me and I really want this feature! The problem I encounter is the inability of the LLM to look stuff up and respond to me. "What's that name of that database table?" "What are all the services that call this endpoint?" "Are there any open PRs for this repo right now?" Once information can flow in both directions not just one it will be a gamechanger for me.

This works today right? What part of this are you missing?

Re: Codex-maxxing

#50

Post by esperent »

dist-epoch wrote: post #29
esperent wrote: post #7

> Every 30 minutes, check Slack and Gmail for unanswered messages that need my attention... > When I come back to Slack, replies are often already sitting in drafts. I still decide what gets sent, but the expensive part of gathering context is done. This just feels so dystopian to me. I hope that I never work with you or someone else doing this. I personally do use LLMs for work messaging but I'm extremely careful to…

Sounds more like CYA. If instead of LLM you googled do you also say "Here are the CPU architectures pytorch supports, that Google search returned"

I mean, up to a point, yes.

If I've researched something and it's my thoughts, it's from me. If I've Google for 30 seconds and copied over the top result, then I generally say it.

Or rather, I generally don't even send that message because I try to my messages have actual substance.

Post reply on HN