Do software engineers here feel threatened by this? I certainly am. I'm surprised that this topic is almost entirely missing in these threads.
[dead]
GPT-5.3-Codex
491–500 of 634 posts
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#492Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unless you're retiring in less than 5 years this is extremely short sighted.
What would things look like to make someone with currently ~10 years of experience unemployable? It's possible the job might change drastically, but I'm struggling to think of any scenario that doesn't also put most white collar professions out of work alongside me, and I don't think that's worth worrying about
Unemployable is a charged word. A lot of outdated professions still have professionals. There are still professional horse drawn carriages.
If the AI performance gains are 50% improvement, and companies decide they rather cut costs and pocket the difference, could be due to many factors, that leaves millions out of a job. And those performance gains are coming for many white collar jobs. I guess your premise is mass unemployment is not worth worrying about, so okay then.
Marginal changes in productivity can make huge impacts to industries employment rates.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#493Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please no, I don’t need my quick prototypes hardened against every perceivable threat.
In most cases security is not a matter of adding anything in particular, but a matter of just not making specific types of mistakes.
Is there ever a reason to store passwords in plaintext instead of as a hash? Even in a prototype.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#494Earlier quoted context omitted.
well with the recent delays i can easily find claude code going off on it's own for 20 minutes and have no idea what it's going to come back with. but one time it overflowed it's context on a simple question, and then used up the rest of my session window. in a way a lot of ai assistants have ime have this awkward thing where they complicate something in a non-visible and think about it for a long time burning up con…
The key is a well defined task with strong guardrails. You can add these to your agents file over time or you can probably just find someone's online to copy the basics from. Any time you find it doing something you didn't expect or don't like, add guardrails to prevent that in future. Claude hooks are also useful here, along with the hookify plugin to create them for you based on the current conversation.
I have started using openspec for this. I find it works far better to have a proposal and a list of tasks the ai stays more focused.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#495Do software engineers here feel threatened by this? I certainly am. I'm surprised that this topic is almost entirely missing in these threads.
AI is mostly garbage at creating useful abstractions. I'd feel threatened if I was a competitive programmer or IMO kid
Tell me you haven’t used codex-xhigh without telling me you haven’t used it. It’s bad at overall architecture and big picture. But not at useful abstractions.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#496Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why even come to this site if you're so anti-innovation? Today with LLMs you can literally spend 5 minutes defining what you want to get, press send, go grab a coffee and come back to a working POC of something, in literally any programming language. This is literally stuff of wonders and magic that redefines how we interface with computers and code. And the only thing you can think of is to ask if it can do somethin…
Agree but you are talking about a POC, and he is talking about reliable, working software. this phase of LLM are perfect for POCs and there you can have 10x speedup, no question. But going from a POC to a working reliable software is where most of our time is spent anyway even without LLMS. With LLMs this phase becomes worse. we speedup 10x the poc time, we slow down almost as much in the next phases, because now you…
> no real increase in final delivry times
That’s not true though. The ability to de-risk concepts within a day instead of weeks will speed up the timeline tremendously.
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#497Earlier quoted context omitted.
I use that to feed back into my spec development and prompting and CI harnesses, not steering in real time. Every mistake is a chance to fix the system so that mistake is less likely or impossible. I rarely fix anything in real time - you review, see issues, fix them in the spec, reset the branch back to zero and try again. Generally, the spec is the part I develop interactively, and then set it loose to go crazy. Th…
I assumed you'd build such a massive set of rules (that claude often does not obey) that you'd eat up your context very quickly. I've actually removed all plugins / MCPs because they chewed up way too much context.
It's as much about what to remove as what to add. Curation is the key. Skills also give you some levers to get the kind of context-sensitive instruction you need, though I haven't delved too deeply into them. My current total instruction set is around ~2500 tokens at the moment
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#498Page me when codex can run the right version of node. Are we all changing the system node version to match the current project again?
[shell_environment_policy]
inherit = "all"
experimental_use_profile = true
[shell_environment_policy.set]
NVM_DIR = "[redacted]"
PATH = "[redacted]"
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#499I'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.
If their pay as you go api token prices reflect their internal costs then it makes sense, but it could also be that claude makes money while gpt sells at loss to stay on top. Claude is way more expensive overall, and way more limited with flat rate subscriptions
opus: 5/25 gpt: 1.75/14
Re: GPT-5.3-Codex
#500Earlier quoted context omitted.
what do you do?
He works on brain-melting stuff, the understanding of which is far beyond us.
It's relatively easy for people to grok, if a bit niche. Just sometimes confuses LLMs. Humans are much better at holding space for rare exceptions to usual rules than LLMs are.