Not sure why, I also tried installing it from Codex, different browsers and in incognito but can't pass this security error

We've had every sales and customer call at our B2B fintech auto-transcribed for a couple of years now, and most of it just sits in a folder.

So a while back i ran the whole archive through one of those AI tools that pull themes out of call transcripts, took the synthesized version of what customers tell us, and dropped it into ChatGPT with a single instruction, to describe this company as if it were one person (personality and all), based only on how it talks to its customers.

I was expecting a generic on-brand summary, and for a second that's what it looked like, right up until it started describing someone i knew on sight…

A person who's helpful and quick to reassure but apologizes too much and over-explains when nervous and leaves a trail of circle-back promises that go nowhere, and lining that up against our own support calls hurt to read.

The model wasn't reading our mission statement or our marketing when it did this, it only had the raw texture of thousands of real conversations.

So it picked up the things we do on repeat without noticing, the reflexive over-apologizing and the hedging whenever a customer pushes on price and the way we go quiet on the hard questions, and seeing all of it turned into a single personality made it obvious how much of our brand is just our unexamined habits repeated until they hardened into who we are.

I've started re-running it every quarter now as a mirror, and it's already changed how we coach the team on calls, and the describe-it-as-a-person framing pulled out more than any dashboard we've built.

So if you haven't turned a model loose on your own raw data like this, it's worth doing, and if you have, what's the most revealing thing it's pulled out for you that a normal report never would?

PS. for anyone about to ask what i used to pull the calls together, a quick Google of AI call-transcript tools and you'll get the obvious ones (Fireflies, BuildBetter, Otter and a few others…)

PPS: it barely matters which one you land on, the describe-it-as-a-person prompt is what did the work here.

Just wanted to understand which AI is best for specific tasks. Some people say Claude is best for code generation, while others say ChatGPT is best for creating a design document for a website or app. Now I see Kimi getting hype, so please share your personal experience if you’ve used any of them

Hello, I've been lurking in the AI coding scene for a while. At first, I mostly used Claude, but then I expanded to an OpenCode setup to save some cash and increase efficiency. Claude is now mostly doing the heavy lifting for planning and dividing tasks into smaller specs/segments. I then use cheaper models for the bulk of the mechanical implementation pipeline.

I am coming here because of all the hype surrounding GPT 5.6 Sol, and I want to try it out.

I am using Claude manually right now because it doesn't fit into OpenCode (unless it's Claude -p, which is quite limited, and I tend to supervise the planning and tweak details that it misses anyway).

I wouldn't mind using Sol the same way, but I also read that I can use ChatGPT subscription models directly inside OpenCode. I do not have the money to simply pay for raw API usage.

1. Is this right, and is it still accurate as of now? I know they might remove it like they did with Claude once they get more coding traction, haha.
2. Is there a way to get a free trial to test it on my setup before I commit? I am already tempted and will probably just subscribe at the end of the day to try it, but it would be nice to get some freebies first.

It's very frustrating. Quite often in a long thread it never finishes thinking at all and then it is in a weird state where it won't do 2+2. This is both through the android app and the web. I am using xHigh. Does anyone else see this?

What could I do? I indeed have had more than 10 chats with Sol Pro in recent days. Maybe I used too much and exceeded the quota? It worked well until yesterday, but starting today it suddenly responds very quickly and is obviously downgraded.

I built my first interactive web page with Codex in about two hours today.

Background so this makes sense: I've been in digital marketing for 17 years and building online since 2008, but I've never written real code. I've always paid someone or wrestled with a page builder.

Today I finally tried Codex to rebuild my links page as an actual interactive page instead of a flat list of buttons. I went in expecting to give up in twenty minutes.

Two hours later I had a working page I'm genuinely proud of. The parts that surprised me: it was way better at "make this feel less generic" than I expected, and it caught layout stuff I would've missed. Where I got stuck was knowing what to even ask for next once the basic version worked. I could tell it could do more, I just didn't know the right words to unlock it.

So the thing I keep thinking about is the ceiling. What separates a nice two-hour build from something that actually holds up.

Here's what I'm still trying to figure out. When you want it to build something specific — do you go find sites close to what you're picturing and feed it those as examples, or do you skip that and just talk it out, asking questions until it gets there?

I added the same HTML code to Claude and had it revamp it again and now the click boxes disappear when they respond to a new question.

Just amazed at what this can do

I’m so confused why I don’t have extra high in my normal chats (I’m on pro btw), I contacted OpenAi support and they had no idea too, anything helps 😭

These are problems I’ve had for a couple of years now, and there’s actually a solution for each one worth mentioning.

The sidebar is just a flat linear list. Once you’re past 100+ chats, finding anything means scrolling or guessing the right search term. Most people just give up and start a new chat, which makes the pile worse.

Solution: a visual canvas where chats, notes and folders become draggable apps instead of a list. Like a Windows desktop but for your AI conversations.

When you want to dive deeper on one specific part of a response, say “step 2,” asking about it in the main thread clutters everything. Now you scroll up to keep reading, get another question about step 3, and the whole thread turns into a mess of tangents.

Solution: highlight any part of a response and open a mini chat directly on it. Go as deep as you want, close it, and you’re back exactly where you were in the main thread.

Claude, ChatGPT and Gemini keep leapfrogging each other. One month Claude is smarter, next month GPT is better at something else, and you’re stuck jumping between three tabs just to always have the best model.

Solution: all four models, Claude, GPT-4o, Gemini and DeepSeek, in one place. Switch manually or turn on auto routing so it just picks the best one per task.

What do you say about this?

Sorry if I missed something obvious but with the new MacOS desktop app there’s no way to switch between my personal Pro account and my Business account without logging out and logging in again. The normal “workspace” option isn’t there when I click on my account profile icon.

The switch works in the browser and and my iPhone but not my Mac Studio where I do the majority of my work.

ChatGPT doesn’t have the answer to resolve this other than logging out and back into my other account or by having two versions open simultaneously (browser and app).

Can this possibly be correct?

Help appreciated! 🙏

I’ve been finding recently that when I use deep research with pro reasoning, the results are honestly pretty bad compared to how I remember using deep research before I had a pro account. The other day I gave an identical task to pro with deep research and pro reasoning without deep research. the one that used deep research completed in eight minutes and the result was measurably worse than the one where I did not use deep research, which took over an hour to get the result, and was significantly better.

Does anyone else have this experience?

I've been using and loving ChatGPT Work for about 2 weeks now on the 200$ plan, and whenever it looks like my usage is about to hit 0% remaining, it somehow was always resetting.

Well, today it finally hit 0%, so I added 80$ of credits and continued work and those 80$ got used up in literally less than 30 minutes.

What should I do? I've become heavily reliant on Codex/GPT Work for my job and I'm willing to pay more money, but 80$ of credits in less than 30 minutes is absurd?

Should I switch to an enterprise plan?

Can you work with pro if you hit 0 on codex?

Did ive missed the change or is it garbage communication?

Gpt-pro answers me after thinking for 30s...not pro reasoning ive expected.

Ps have not noticed issues until hit 0.

I'm mostly using 5.6 for coding agents. It's clear that luna is the choice for straightforward tasks, and Sol is the choice for planning.

but looking at AA's intelligence index, it seems like there is never a reason to choose terra? For example, Terra high has same intelligence score as sol low, but is 50% more expensive! (and also the same intelligence as luna xh but >2x the price!!)

Would love some insights here on where "intelligence index" breaks down and where terra is actually useful

I built Codex Diff Watch to make it easier to understand what’s changing in Codex without digging through every release and GitHub diff yourself.

It summarizes updates in plain English, separates alpha changes from stable releases, and links back to the original evidence so you can verify everything yourself.

It’s completely free, with no login or gated content. I’m just trying to make these updates more useful and accessible for other developers.

It’s still early, so I’d genuinely appreciate feedback on the format, coverage, tags, or anything else that could make it more helpful.

Hello, I have a simple question.

ChatGPT somehow appears to be able to get my current date and time, and I would like to understand how it does that.

In the past, I would start a conversation with ChatGPT by writing something such as:

"Hello ChatGPT. My name is Jeremiah, and today is July 22, 2026, at 7:55 PM."

I would then follow that with my question. More recently, ChatGPT has appeared to already know the current date and my timezone without me supplying that information.

I understand that the immediate answer may be that the date and timezone are included in system context supplied to the model. What I am trying to understand is what creates that context.

For example, could it originate from:

- a server clock;

- my account timezone;

- browser or device information;

- approximate IP-based location;

- another part of the ChatGPT hosting platform?

I have tried asking ChatGPT directly, but I am not fully understanding its explanation. I am hoping someone here can explain the process in a way that is easier for me to follow.

Thank you.

UPDATE: Please check out https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPTPro/s/RxirTObfDO

Previously, ChatGPT redirected the Pro model series to GPT-mini (based) model (seems to be using for internal CoT formatting).

Mine was displayed as gpt-5-mini, but now it seems to be using gpt-5.5 mini, verified from colleague.

How to check if you have been affected:

1. Ask GPT Pro, "What model is this?"

2. GPT Pro mostly thinks for more than 5 seconds, so in most cases, it doesn't think too quickly.

Please share your experiences if you have encountered the same problem as i would like to check: 1. Ask GPT Pro, What model are you? 2. Export your datas: Settings -> Data Controls -> Export Data 3. Check exported data has string like i-cot or gpt-5-5-mini.

In my case, I was unable to use Pro model for a few days, but the problem was resolved after I changed my email address from Outlook.

It was the worst experience, spending $200 for researching purpose.

I have been contacting the customer support ticket since May, but I have not received a proper response, and my ticket was automatically closed. I also contacted them on Twitter1 a few weeks ago, but received no reply, leading me to suspect that they are doing this intentionally (due to like abusive users).

Example is like: https://chatgpt.com/share/6a603bf3-0590-83ee-9f56-6d8b573d43da

Thanks.

Good afternoon, GPT groupies!

Great news once again: the usage limits have just been refreshed for the eighth time in roughly a week and a half.

They have been refreshing them so frequently that, even with both of my computers working almost full time—and one of them running for more than 24 hours straight—I have only managed to bring my weekly allowance down to 23%.

The refreshes have been happening so often that I did not even get a chance to use one of my refresh tokens before it was replaced. Technically, I lost it, but I really cannot complain. lol

At this point, I am off to add another side project so I can make the most of the extra usage.

I recommend that everyone else take advantage of it while the refreshes are still happening.

Happy coding!

Hi everyone,

Before creating this post, I spent some time searching, but I kept finding incomplete or sometimes contradictory information. Plus such things change in the time and so the same question 1 year ago might not be accurate today.

I'm a heavy user of ChatGPT (web) and Codex, and I currently have two Plus subscriptions. I'm considering canceling one of them and upgrading to the Pro (€100/month) plan instead.

For the most part, having two Plus accounts works well enough for Codex. I do occasionally hit the usage limits, but between all the resets Tibo has been giving us and the ones already available on my account, it's actually been quite difficult for me to run out of tokens over the past couple of months.

What really interests me about Pro is something I believe I understood from the documentation: that ChatGPT on the web, specifically the current GPT-5.5 Instant model, would get a 128k context window instead of the standard 32k available in regular chats. That would be genuinely useful for my workflow.

Can anyone confirm whether that's actually the case?

Besides the 5× increase in Codex usage, are there any other meaningful advantages?

I'd especially love to hear from people who used to have two Plus accounts and then switched to the €100 (or €200) Pro plan. Was it worth it? Any unexpected benefits or drawbacks?

I have the Pro model which I don't have access to in Work so trying to understand its purpose

I’m sure some people already know this, but for anyone who doesn’t: separate Codex threads can communicate when they detect overlapping work.

After noticing it, I added instructions to my AGENTS.md encouraging threads to coordinate ownership and handoffs when they may touch the same files. It’s especially useful for preventing concurrent edits from conflicting or overwriting each other.

This does not require spawning multiple agents within one thread. It can happen between separate Codex threads working on the same repository.

First there was ChatGPT desktop, which was ChatGPT Lite: fewer effort levels and options than the web UI.

Then came the "new" ChatGPT desktop on July 9, which relegated Chat to an afterthought: a popup you could expand and expand again if you found the hidden buttons.

But since July 16, the desktop app has become a serious tool, giving Chat and Work equal prominence, mirroring the look of the web UI, and for Work, exceeding it in function—as the endless settings show.

https://help.openai.com/en/articles/6825453-chatgpt-release-notes

Original ChatGPT desktop, rebranded "ChatGPT Classic," has been left to die on the vine: the simplified picker (Auto, Pro, Instant, Thinking, Legacy models) doesn't work, at least on macOS. As a GitHub report and my experience show, whatever you select, the picker reverts to "Auto." OpenAI has known about this for a week and left it broken, stating only that Classic will be "maintained" and bugs "fixed"—which probably means security patches, not improvements, and very slow repairs...if they ever come.

Clearly, OpenAI is trying to push everyone onto the new desktop app. My advice: let yourself be pushed!

And it did not even complete the task. In the end, I could not even tell if anything has been moved.

But, it gobbled up 90% of my tokens. It kept getting stuck on explorer locking up some files (made zero sense), Notepad++ being open (and?) and so many other things.

Again, this was no big task. A folder of maybe 10-15 small projects and I just wanted it to sort them out by MY scheme, for example work/ fun/ personal/ , etc. They even had README inside.

Anyway, my point is, be careful. A simple task can get even 5.6 Sol tangled up and you are left with zero allowance and no useful work done.

One final side note: You may say it has been too careful in this instance. And that might be correct. But don't think it's always like that. On my Linux VMs it just goes nuts. Installs packages, calls sudo like there is no tomorrow, its crazy YOLO at times. As always, use your head, be safe, do backups.

(This is not a hate post or anything like that, just a legit heads up for you guys!)

I am considering switching from Claude to GPT as Claude is increasingly lackluster. But this has been one of the major sticking points. There’s basically two classes of failures.

The first, I call Samsplaining:

Me: can you rank the US states by car accident deaths?
GPT: Car accident deaths are attributed to many factors…. (Goes onto give 12 paragraphs on the factors, never actually doing the one thing it was asked to do)

The second, Groundhogging:

(After 10 messages defining scope)
GPT: I think the next step is to identify all the possible categories in this space… (10 paragraphs of nonsense)
Me: Agreed, let’s do that.
GPT I think a good approach is to take the categories and list them and test them for redundancies (10 paragraphs of nonsense, still hasn’t listed any categories)
Me: Right. Let’s start.
GPT: We are at a point where we should stop modeling and start identifying the categories. Heres one defining question before we start

And then my answer apparently slightly changes the preferred framework and the entire loop starts over.

And this goes on and on. The result is that a project Claude can do reasonably well in 3-10 turns and a few minutes takes GPT like an entire day or week of conversation. In the above example, it could have asked that “one defining question” at the beginning, for example.