Live data from Hacker News

Codex for almost everything

openai.com

501–510 of 600 posts

Re: Codex for almost everything

#501
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it was many hours of working with codex, guidance and comparing to known-good outputs from previous years, but a sufficiently smart model would be able to just do it without any steering; it'd still take hours, but my input wouldn't be necessary. a harness for getting this done probably exists today, gastown perhaps or something that the frontier labs are sitting on.

If you can assume "a sufficiently smart piece of technology" that doesn't exist now, a lot of problems become trivial

yes.

but then, respect the trendline, especially if it's exponential.

Re: Codex for almost everything

#502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Anyone trying to stay safe will be on the gradient to a Stallmanesque monastic computing existence. As a proud neo-luddite, I'm watching the AI hype with grim amusement and I'll tell you hwhat, it doesn't look like a good time. Even putting to one side the planetary scale economic crash that is incoming, all the hypers seem to be on some sort of treadmill that is out of their control and it simply doesn't look like…

Do you think that avoidance is going to protect you from the fall-out?

Everyone keeps saying how essential it all is yet a few years in and I still don’t see anything like the promised future of “everyone using them every day for everything.” Everyone’s just constantly talking (or stressing) about it.

We - including the companies - don’t know what the real “billion dollar application” of them is other than the unproven claim it makes everyone more productive in some general sense. When it doesn’t work people continue to say “it’s your fault not the tool’s.” Meanwhile investors are getting skittish and not one AI company is profitable yet. Companies that laid people off for LLM’s are regretting their decisions, leadership (and educators) is dealing with unvetted writing and having to waste their time cleaning it up, the list goes on. “Slop” is still a huge and growing problem.

LLM’s are here to stay, but IMO it’ll be more relevant in the long run than 3D printers yet less revolutionary than the internet. Everyone will touch them at various points but this whole-life, every-industry-disrupted integration still seems far fetched to me. Pricing is still a huge unsolved problem - everyone is still subsidized and despite gains in using fewer resources, it’s still too much to run these locally, even small models (not even getting into tooling and knowledge required to use them in a productive way).

When we zoom out and look at the whole picture, LLM’s have mostly made everyone’s online experience worse while the VC funded companies behind them are playing municipal and state governments’ for suckers a la Amazon getting so many cities to trip over each other giving away land and tax breaks, but far worse. Those are the biggest contributions so far aside from anecdotes from coders about “1000x productivity.” Again, I think they’re here to stay. But it’s called “AI hype” for a reason.

LLM’s have mostly been a problem creator IME rather than a “disruptor.” Never really seen “revolutionary technology” quite like it.

But hey, I’ll admit it’s useful to have a meh local model when I’m writing TTRPG stuff and have writer’s block. Though then I remember how it was trained, a whole other subject I haven’t even touched, so that kind of sucks too.

Re: Codex for almost everything

#503

All of you are ironically completely oblivious to the fact that you're training your own replacement by using these tools, you're even paying for it. Eventually, the companies you work for will just "hire" Anthropic or OpenAI agents in your place and you'll be out of job, no matter your seniority. Mark my words.

I mean, sentiment in this thread (and the neighboring Opus 4.7 one) are overwhelmingly negative this time around. That comment prob would have made more sense around 4.5/4.6. That said, until models produce verifiably correct work (which is a difficult, if not impossible, bar to clear), I sorta doubt it. Not because humans intrinsically produce better or smarter work (arguably, many humans across many domains already…

> doesn't really work with a black box code generator.

Sure it does, just blame the vendor.

"Nobody ever got fired for picking IBM/OpenAI/whatever AI incumbent"

Re: Codex for almost everything

#504

Lots of scepticism here, but I think this may really take off. After 25 years of heavy CLI use, lately I've found myself using codex (in terminal) for terminal tasks I've previously done using CLI commands. If someone manages to make a robust GUI version of this for normies, people will lap it up. People don't want to juggle applications, we want computers to do what we want/need them to do.

> tasks I've previously done using CLI commands. Great, now you perform those tasks more slowly, using up a lot more computing power, with your activities and possibly data recorded by some remote party of questionable repute.

He is using a lot less computing power where it counts, his own.

Re: Codex for almost everything

#505
post #51

My current expectation is that the Cowork/Codex set of "professional agents" for non-technical users will be one of the most important and fastest growing product categories of all time, so far. i.e. agents for knowledge workers who are not software engineers A few thoughts and questions: 1. I expect that this set of products will be extremely disruptive to many software businesses. It's like when a new VP joins a co…

> My current expectation is that the Cowork/Codex set of "professional agents" for non-technical users will be one of the most important and fastest growing product categories of all time, so far. I agree this is going to be big. I threw a prototype of a domain-specific agent into the proverbial hornets' nest recently and it has altered the narrative about what might be possible. The part that makes this powerful is…

>The part that makes this powerful is that the LLM is the ultimate UI/UX

Seems pretty questionable to me. Describing things in natural language can be quite imprecise and verbose.

Re: Codex for almost everything

#506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Claude has this part yet: > With background computer use, Codex can now use all of the apps on your computer by seeing, clicking, and typing with its own cursor. Multiple agents can work on your Mac in parallel, without interfering with your own work in other apps.

Yes it does: https://code.claude.com/docs/en/desktop#let-claude-use-your-...

I’m referring to how it can use your computer in the background.

Re: Codex for almost everything

#508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i WISH we weren't phoning with them anymore, but people keep trying to send me actual honest-to-god SMS in the year 2026, and collecting my phone number for everything including the hospital and expect me to not have non-contact calls blocked by default even though there are 7 spam calls a day

In what world would I prefer to give someone access to me via a messaging app rather than a fully-async text SMS message? I don't even love that people can see if you've read their texts now. Fully agree about phone calls though.

I believe that in all of South America people exclusively use WhatsApp to communicate via text because SMS is only used for spam and bad 2FA. Companies are even using WhatsApp for 2FA now instead of SMS and the fact that americans use SMS is viewed as a joke.

Re: Codex for almost everything

#509

Has anyone figured out how to stop the Codex app from draining my M5 Pro's battery in like 2 hours? I can literally just have it open and my lap turns into a heater. I've tried adjusting all sorts of settings and haven't been able to make a dent. I'm assuming its the garbage renderer.

Depending on what you're working on, codex could be starting long running tasks that are never terminated and keep spinning in the background.

Re: Codex for almost everything

#510
post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can assume "a sufficiently smart piece of technology" that doesn't exist now, a lot of problems become trivial

yes. but then, respect the trendline, especially if it's exponential.

Is it exponential or logistic?
Post reply on HN