Live data from Hacker News

GPT-5.4

openai.com

491–500 of 868 posts

Re: GPT-5.4

#491

Earlier quoted context omitted.

in my testing codex actually planned worse than claude but coded better once the plan is set, and faster. it is also excellent to cross check claude's work, always finding great weakness each time.

That’s why I think the sweet spot is to write up plans with Claude and then execute them with Codex

And it fits well with the $20 plans for each since Codex seems to provide about 7-8x more usage than Claude.

Re: GPT-5.4

#492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but it's my pet peeve. If you're on iOS/macOS I built a 100% free and privacy-friendly app to get rid of tracking parameters from hundreds of different websites, not just X/Twitter. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/clean-links-qr-code-reader/id6...

This is great! I have been meaning to implement this sort of thing in my existing Shortcuts flow but I see you already support it in Shortcuts! Thank you for this! Anywhere I can toss a Tip for this free app?

I'm glad you like it. :)

Re: GPT-5.4

#493
post #69

These releases are lacking something. Yes, they optimised for benchmarks, but it’s just not all that impressive anymore. It is time for a product, not for a marginally improved model.

They have a product now. Mass surveillance and fully automated killing machines.

Re: GPT-5.4

#494
post #335

What a model mess! OpenAI now has three price points: GPT 5.1, GPT 5.2 and now GPT 5.4. There version numbers jump across different model lines with codex at 5.3, what they now call instant also at 5.3. Anthropic are really the only ones who managed to get this under control: Three models, priced at three different levels. New models are immediately available everywhere. Google essentially only has Preview models! Th…

Not sure why you think Anthropic has not the same problems? Their version numbers across different model lines jump around too... for Opus we have 4.6, 4.5, 4.1 then we have Sonnet at 4.6, 4.5, and 4.1? No version 4.1 here, and there is Haiku, no 4.6, but 4.5 and no 4.1, no 4 but then we only have old 3.5...

Also their pricing based on 5m/1h cache hits, cash read hits, additional charges for US inference (but only for Opus 4.6 I guess) and optional features such as more context and faster speed for some random multiplier is also complex and actually quiet similar to OpenAI's pricing scheme.

To me it looks like everybody has similar problems and solutions for the same kinds of problems and they just try their best to offer different products and services to their customers.

Re: GPT-5.4

#495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, but it's my pet peeve. If you're on iOS/macOS I built a 100% free and privacy-friendly app to get rid of tracking parameters from hundreds of different websites, not just X/Twitter. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/clean-links-qr-code-reader/id6...

So what is your motivation for doing this, incidentally? Can you be explicit about it? I am genuinely curious. Especially when it’s to the point of, you know, nagging/policing people to do it the way you’d prefer, when you could just redirect your router requests from x.com to xcancel.com

It's not particularly about x.com, hundreds of site like x, youtube, facebook, linkedin, tiktok etc surreptitious add tracking parameters to their links. The iOS Messages app even hides these tracking parameters. I don't like being surreptitiously tracked online and judging by the success of my free app, there are millions of people like me.

Re: GPT-5.4

#496
post #335

What a model mess! OpenAI now has three price points: GPT 5.1, GPT 5.2 and now GPT 5.4. There version numbers jump across different model lines with codex at 5.3, what they now call instant also at 5.3. Anthropic are really the only ones who managed to get this under control: Three models, priced at three different levels. New models are immediately available everywhere. Google essentially only has Preview models! Th…

Incredibly curious how Google's approach to support, naming, versioning etc will mesh with the iOS integration.

Re: GPT-5.4

#497

I've only used 5.4 for 1 prompt (edit: 3@high now) so far (reasoning: extra high, took really long), and it was to analyse my codebase and write an evaluation on a topic. But I found its writing and analysis thoughtful, precise, and surprisingly clearly written, unlike 5.3-Codex. It feels very lucid and uses human phrasing. It might be my AGENTS.md requiring clearer, simpler language, but at least 5.4's doing a good…

The latest research these days is that including an AGENTS.md file only makes outcomes worse with frontier models.

From what I remember, this was for describing the project’s structure over letting the model discover it itself, no?

Because how else are you going to teach it your preferred style and behavior?

Re: GPT-5.4

#498
post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using Codex for software development personally (I have a ChatGPT account), and I use Claude at work (since it is provided by my employer). I find both Codex and Claude Opus perform at a similar level, and in some ways I actually prefer Codex (I keep hitting quota limits in Opus and have to revert back to Sonnet). If your question is related to morality (the thing about US politics, DoD contract and so on).…

> I've been using Codex for software development personally (I have a ChatGPT account), and I use Claude at work (since it is provided by my employer). Exact same situation here. I've been using both extensively for the last month or so, but still don't really feel either of them is much better or worse. But I have not done large complex features with it yet, mostly just iterative work or small features. I also feel…

> overly specific

I have a hypothesis that people who have patience and reasonably well-developed written language skills will scratch their heads at why everyone else is having so much difficulty.

Re: GPT-5.4

#499

Inline poll: What reasoning levels do you work with? This becomes increasingly less clear to me, because the more interesting work will be the agent going off for 30mins+ on high / extra high (it's mostly one of the two), and that's a long time to wait and an unfeasible amount of code to a/b

For directed coding (implementing an already specified plan) or asking questions about a codebase I use 5.3 codex with medium reasoning effort. It is relatively quick feeling.

I like Sonnet 4.6 a lot too at medium reasoning effort, but at least in Cursor it is sometimes quite slow because it will start "thinking" for a long time.

Re: GPT-5.4

#500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The latest research these days is that including an AGENTS.md file only makes outcomes worse with frontier models.

:( how can i get claude to always make sure it prettier-s and lints changes before pushing up the pr though?

I think what that research found is that _auto-generated_ agent instructions made results slightly worse, but human-written ones made them slightly better, presumably because anything the model could auto-generate, it could also find out in-context.

But especially for conventions that would be difficult to pick up on in-context, these instruction files absolutely make sense. (Though it might be worth it to split them into multiple sub-files the model only reads when it needs that specific workflow.)

Post reply on HN