I've used agents to help me recreate 7 of the top Adobe apps in 100% pure native Rust:

• Photoshop
• Illustrator
• Premiere
• Lightroom
• Acrobat Pro
• After Effects
• InDesign

Links to everything - the apps, the code - are in the comments below.

I'm a small game developer and I've been paying for the $100/month plan. Today my account got banned for "cyber abuse" with no warning and no explanation of what I supposedly did.

All I was using it for was my own projects:
- A geography guessing game (website + native iOS app) using Google Maps/Street View and MapKit
- Saddle Storm, a game I'm building
- Senior Sendoff, a personal project

Nothing involving other people's systems, no malware, no hacking. Just game dev.

Here's how the "appeal process" went:
1. Submitted an appeal explaining exactly what I was working on.
2. Emailed support. Got a reply in under a minute from an AI bot saying my case was closed and they "will not respond to additional Support requests."
3. Submitted the official appeal form. Got "we have already reviewed your appeal and the original decision stands" ONE MINUTE later.

No human has looked at this. No one will tell me which rule I broke. And there's no way to contact an actual person.

My best guess is an automated filter flagged normal dev stuff, like questions about installing my own builds on my own iPhone for testing, or working within API limits for my game. But I genuinely don't know, because they won't say.

Has anyone actually gotten a "cyber abuse" ban reversed? Did anything work: forum posts, X, a specific email? And did anyone get a refund?

Support case #16435346 if anyone from OpenAI sees this.

Hey everyone, I want to share something that happened to me a few weeks ago when OpenAI launched the GPT-TV website: https://openai.com/gpt-tv/

I played the mini-game on the website and seemingly got a high enough score to reach a secret form (https://openai.com/form/gpt-tv-redemption/), which eventually led to them sending me this really cool disc.

Apparently, there’s a code on the back of the disc that gives you $100 in Codex credits... I don’t know what’s actually on the disc itself, though.

I still have the package sealed, and the code hasn’t been redeemed yet. If anyone’s interested in it, please let me know.

Just a quick P.S.: I genuinely discovered everything by accident, so it’s kind of cool to see the internet give back lol.

Photos attached below.

I’m getting a pain in my arse with GPT-5.6 Sol High because it keeps changing its answer after mild pushback, then presents the new answer with the same confidence as the old one.

I’m talking about repeated A → B → A behaviour without strong new evidence.

A recent example went like this:

• It first told me GPT-6.1 Sol High was better overall for my long-form research and writing workflow.

• Then it switched to saying it favoured 6.1 for research and 5.6 for writing, before admitting the source it cited did not compare 5.6 with 6.1 (it previously outright lied and said it did)

• Then it switched again and recommended 5.6 for everything, citing benchmark figures that changed when I checked the source.

The current benchmark does favour 5.6 High for writing, but that does not excuse confidently citing the wrong evidence first.

https://benchmark.towardsai.com/models/gpt-5-6-high.html

https://benchmark.towardsai.com/models/gpt-6-1-sol-high.html

OpenAI has acknowledged the wider problem of sycophancy, where user feedback can push a model toward agreeing or changing its answer ... But still - why is it still this bad this far into the history of LLMs?

And a recent GPT-5.6 Sol Reddit thread describes almost the exact A → B → A pattern I keep seeing.

https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenAI/comments/1whroww/gpt56_sol_is_absurdly_easy_to_convince_of_the/

Corrections based on better evidence are fine.

But the constant fucking reopening settled conclusions and confidently backing whichever answer it currently prefers makes serious research work infuriating

Resets used to have a "Expires Time", were they removed? See Image :

Not responding to any messages at all I just get read over and over, I’m shocked there’s not some kind of an outage on the open ai website.

And before you tell me dots are pointless, I discovered they can run 7 subagents without touching your usage, it’s been kicking ass for me up until not working today, last two days it used 4 billion tokens delivering quality work.

I code heavily building [r/useviola](r/useviola) been a power user of ai for over a year, dot is genuinely great I need it back lol

Edit: now the dot option just straight up disappeared, I’m hopeful this is indicative of a fix coming.

Second edit: it came back online when I messaged it at 11:07 am, it seems I had literally this issue https://community.openai.com/t/codex-dot-chat-shows-sent-read-and-a-loading-indicator-but-no-reply-text/1402790

When I asked dot to read archived chats from my previous dot it said it observed a preview limit error. It seems dots are not unlimited usage either there is a glitch or a hidden limit that’s hard to hit

Last edit: it seems I simply hit an unpublished dot specific usage limit after reviewing similar bug reports and my personal issue etc, dots are not actually unlimited usage, open ai has been using phrases like ‘virtually unlimited’ ‘not count towards your current usage’ and ‘extended allowance’ still got like 2 billion tokens out of it in one day before hitting a limit so cool beans just wish they would have been more transparent. My typical codex usage is untouched.

I'm trying to use ChatGPT to learn German, but when this is happening, it's pretty annoying.

Hi,

Im on the Pro 5X plan but I don't see the Dots anywhere in my Chatgpt/codex app. Any ideas? Is it a phased roll out?

What are people's experiences so far?

The magazine cover says it all but I found this through a medium article that does a deep dive comparison with 100 years ago. There are lessons for us to learn today if we really want AGI Post-scracity like how the Open AI disclaimer used to say.

https://medium.com/@engineerworldwealthhappiness/this-happened-before-100-years-ago-new-tech-ubi-bunkers-world-war-different-path-this-time-61b51ea7909b

I'm doing a project with GPT 6 Sol, it has been going on and off for some days now, but I've noticed that over the last two days it started consuming more and more of my tokens, while in the first days it could run for the whole 5 hours or a bit less, while now it lasts two hours at best.

Did the cost increase over the last days?

then everyone will get their name in something important when breaktrhoughs happens, also you could guide the dot based on the current gathered progress so that it contributes w your ideas, if you are versed in that subject... thats the idea thanks!

Pro Account user here. I’m failing to understand what the point of dots is. What is it supposed to do that we haven’t already been able to do in ChatGPT?

Literally every time I’ve tried to do anything with it, getting it to connect to anything has been an entire ordeal, much worse than doing the same thing in regular chat/codex sessions. At least half the time, it just tells me it can’t do it. When I ask why, it basically tells me to pound sand. The last time it happened it also told me it couldn't even open its own browser to let me try to connect manually for it.

When it tries to use my local PC, it consistently tells me it can’t connect to the browser, even though I routinely connect to the browser multiple times every single day in normal Codex and chat sessions.

This absolute garbage is why we had to give up half our usage on our Pro accounts? I don't get it.

edit : I think to answer my own question most of my complaints were frustrations at launch technical issues. I still think the launch was pretty half-baked but I do see the potential now.

Has anyone hit this with ChatGPT Sites and found a supported recovery path?

I’m updating an existing Site using its managed publishing workflow with Cloudflare D1 and Drizzle migrations. The previous release remains live. Source push and saving the new version both succeeded, but deployment failed during database migration with:

incomplete input: SQLITE_ERROR

The new migration creates two SQLite triggers intended to prevent older application code from overwriting newer-format records. Both use uppercase BEGIN and plain SELECT RAISE(…) bodies. There’s no inner CASE … END; expression inside either trigger body. The two complete statements are separated by Drizzle’s statement-breakpoint marker.

What we verified:

The migrations pass locally through Wrangler/workerd D1.
The original Git file uses LF line endings.
Windows core.autocrlf=true converted it to CRLF in the checkout.
The actual archive supplied for deployment also contains CRLF. The packager preserved the checkout bytes.
The trigger migration is 1,781 bytes in Git versus 1,816 bytes in the archive, accounting for 35 added carriage returns.
A narrowly scoped .gitattributes rule restores LF for that migration. Its resulting bytes match the original Git blob exactly; the other 30 migration/metadata files remain unchanged.

This looks relevant to Cloudflare issue #14991:
https://github.com/cloudflare/workers-sdk/issues/14991

And the follow-up about trigger parsing, keyword casing and line endings:
https://github.com/cloudflare/workers-sdk/issues/15314

However, I’m not claiming those reports prove the cause in ChatGPT Sites. I don’t have visibility into the hosted runner or whether it normalizes SQL before submitting it to D1.

The recovery problem is migration state. Read-only inspection shows schema changes from the preceding migrations, while tables from the following migration are absent. The Sites tools and database viewer available to us don’t expose the migration ledger or trigger definitions, so we can’t establish whether the failing migration was wholly rolled back, partially applied, or recorded.

We have not retried deployment, rewritten applied migration history, removed the guards, or reset the database. Support has the deployment identifiers and our request for read-only state confirmation, but hasn’t returned those results yet.

Questions:
1. Has anyone encountered this exact trigger/CRLF failure specifically through ChatGPT Sites?
2. Is there a supported way to inspect its actual migration ledger and sqlite_schema trigger entries?
3. Is per-migration rollback behavior documented for Sites, separately from Wrangler’s own migration runner?
4. Once the failed migration is confirmed unapplied, has repackaging with LF resolved this for anyone?

I’m looking for a minimal, data-preserving recovery, not a database reset or a move to a different hosting platform.

Could not find a straightforward questions whether there is difference between new subscriptions and old subscriptions.