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

411–420 of 634 posts

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#411

Post by halfcat »

_zoltan_ wrote: post #297
ghosty141 wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm personally 100% convinced (assuming prices stay reasonable) that the Codex approach is here to stay. Having a human in the loop eliminates all the problems that LLMs have and continously reviewing small'ish chunks of code works really well from my experience. It saves so much time having Codex do all the plumbing so you can focus on the actual "core" part of a feature. LLMs still (and I doubt that changes) can't…

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.

> given the proper framing

This sounds like never. Most businesses are still shuffling paper and couldn’t give you the requirements for a CRUD app if their lives depended on it.

You’re right, in theory, but it’s like saying you could predict the future if you could just model the universe in perfect detail. But it’s not possible, even in theory.

If you can fully describe what you need to the degree ambiguity is removed, you’ve already built the thing.

If you can’t fully describe the thing, like some general “make more profit” or “lower costs”, you’re in paper clip maximizer territory.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#412

Post by exabrial »

After using Anthropic's products, I think it's going to be difficult to go back to OpenAI. It feels more like a discussion with a peer; ChatGPT has always felt like arguing with an idiot on Reddit.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#413

Post by Rover222 »

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?

Not 100x but absolutely 4x to 5x increase in productivity for everyone on team on a large enterprise codebase that serves the military a lot of serious clients.

To deny at least that level of productivity at this point, you have to have your head in the sand.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#414

Post by fHr »

bcarv wrote: post #371
hyldmo wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but Codex wouldn’t have asked you those questions either

For me, it still asks for confirmation at every decision when using plans. And when multiple unforeseen options appear, it asks again. I don’t think you’ve used Codex in a while.

skill issue

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#415

Post by replwoacause »

timpera wrote: post #310
SunshineTheCat wrote: post #255

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…

In my experience, OpenAI gives you unreasonable amounts of compute for €20/month. I am subscribed to both and Claude's limits are so tiny compared to ChatGPT's that it often feels like a rip-off. Claude also doesn't let you use a worse model after you reach your usage limits, which is a bit hard to swallow when you're paying for the service.

Same experience here. I started our devoutly using Claude but ran into some many limits that I switched back to ChatGPT and it's been night and day. I haven't even really been able to play with the Opus model on my Pro plan because it devours usage and then blocks me for X hours until it resets, costing me a work day. OpenAI has never done that to me. In fact, Codex just churned away for 2 hours on a task and I'm still using it without hitting a limit. I used to love using Claude but the limits are too prohibitive.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#416

Post by replwoacause »

exabrial wrote: post #412

After using Anthropic's products, I think it's going to be difficult to go back to OpenAI. It feels more like a discussion with a peer; ChatGPT has always felt like arguing with an idiot on Reddit.

I agree the tone is better on Claude but the limits suck on the Pro plan.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#417

Post by NamlchakKhandro »

halfcat wrote: post #405
replygirl wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

In this new world, why stop there? It would be even better if engineers were also medical doctors and held multiple doctorate degrees in mathematics and physics and also were rockstar sales people.

sounds like the kinds of hyperbole someone whose just been forced to set a linter for the first time

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#418

Post by energy123 »

AstroBen wrote: post #373
RivieraKid wrote: post #284

Do software engineers here feel threatened by this? I certainly am. I'm surprised that this topic is almost entirely missing in these threads.

No. It turns into a complete mess without someone that knows what they're doing to steer it. It's an upgrade to autocomplete

Unless you're retiring in less than 5 years this is extremely short sighted.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#419

Post by energy123 »

koolala wrote: post #354
argsnd wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of them can do it but Codex has the least frustrating usage limits.

When using it in VSCode? The browser system running its own container seems like it would be the most demanding on their resources. The stand-alone client is Mac-only but I don't know if it makes a difference. My goal is to do it within the usage I get from a $20 monthly plan.

Why would you use it in VSCode?

OpenAI are offering double the normal usage limits for Codex for two months. Go with them and do it in the terminal or the Mac OS codex app if you have a Mac.

Re: GPT-5.3-Codex

#420

Post by apetresc »

JackYoustra wrote: post #377
codethief wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like the researchers behind https://ai-2027.com/ haven't been too far off so far.

> researchers that's certainly one way to refer to Scott Alexander

Scott Alexander essentially provided editing and promotion for AI 2027 (and did a great job of it, I might add). Are you unaware of the actual researchers behind the forecasting/modelling work behind it, and you thought it was actually all done by a blogger? Or are you just being dismissive for fun?
Post reply on HN