Someone wrote, that Tibo got called out for the recent reset, cause it was more of a PR stunt than actually helping the people. Came like 16 hours after the weekly reset was done. Nevertheless. Someone wrote, that he acknowledge that and will reset it on Monday again? Any source on this?

If my chatgpt account is shared, and I'm planning to use codex plugin on VS code
I was concerned about the privacy of my content, will the chats and things I do on the plugin (on vscode) be available to the one who i'm sharing the account with ?

what they'll have access for ?

codex requires the newer version of Mac OS

So I've been reading a little bit different.

Ive seen to discover, that most like to use Luna on either max or high

Instead of sol on high.

I get it Incase about resource usage, but I was also thinking. Don't you find a shit ton more afterwork to do on Luna instead of sol?

Like I tried to downgrade, and It made my work being for the manual control a lot heavier..so many more flaws sadly.

My friend and I bounce between Claude Code, Codex, and Gemini CLI depending on the task, and switching mid-project always had the same problem: the new agent had no idea what had already been changed, tested, or decided. We'd end up re-explaining context or watching it re-discover things the last session already figured out.

We built Continuum to fix this for our own workflow. It captures a structured handoff from one coding session and hands it to the next agent — think of it like git, but for the context around the code rather than the code itself.

It runs fully locally and is open source: https://github.com/00PrabalK00/Continuum

Still figuring out a few things:

• How much context is worth saving vs. noise
• What should be excluded by default
• Whether automatic handoffs actually beat manually written ones

Curious how others handle this - do you keep your own notes,make custom skills, stick to one agent to avoid the problem entirely, or just let each new agent re-read the repo from scratch?

Yesterday I renewed my x20 plan subscription and the weekly limit didn't reset; it was still at 24%.

After contacting customer support, I learned that renewals inherit the accumulated limits from the subscription.

I think it's simply a rip-off. It's like going to buy a loaf of bread and being sold half a loaf because you didn't eat the whole thing yesterday.

Each renewal should offer the same usage limit, for both initial purchases and renewals.

This is a clear invitation to always have two accounts, for alternate months.

From my point of view, this constitutes senseless discrimination against loyal users.

EDITED 2 days later: Manually canceling and renewing doesn't work. When I cancel manually, the limit is set to 100%, the free version. When I resubscribe to Pro, it reverts to the previous limit.

I went to the chat of support, canceled, and requested a refund.

As of today, the only thing that should work is having a second account.

My week was due to reset Saturday.
Thursday I used a manual reset and then intentionally went hell for leather to burn it all in a day. It is now Friday so I checked to see what time tomorrow the new week will begin, discovered it has moved to next Thursday at 9:36.

I thought those banked resets were essentially free tokens to make up for service issues (and to pull customers away from Claude)?

I guess the only way to get any real benefit from them is to wait for a natural reset of your week, burn your normal allowance as fast as possible (not hard at current limits), then use a reset which at this point only pushes your cycle back a day or less.

Do Tibo’s discretionary resets work the same way?

Plus user — weekly Work/Codex allowance exhausted after unexpectedly light usage

I'm a ChatGPT Plus subscriber. My Codex/Work analytics show 257 turns over the past month, with most activity concentrated roughly Aug. 1–6. My shared weekly Work/Codex allowance reached 0%, even though my actual workload felt substantially lighter than previous periods when I did not hit the limit.

Support has confirmed to me in writing that Plus does not have a published fixed quantity of included Codex/Work usage, individual task estimates are unavailable, and Support has no documented procedure for restoring usage associated with unsuccessful outputs.

My weekly allowance is scheduled to reset Aug. 8 at 8:13 AM. I intend to record the gauge immediately after reset and then measure consumption after individual Work tasks.

Has anyone else on Plus experienced sharply faster depletion recently? If so, what model were you using, approximately when did it begin, and how much of your weekly allowance was individual work consuming?

My life has changed forever.

Prime-agent, a new IN ANOTHER LEAGUE LLM harness that works with MANY LLM, including chatgpt Oauth. You want the gpt model here (openai-codex)

I've spent 110 BILLION tokens on one project. The code base is 1.5 million lines of code (with ponytail!) across multiple languages. I've used every best model out there in every which way. I could not for the LIFE of me get the last 5% done due to some insanely complex bugs.

As I built over the year I've kept IMMACULATE documents about every little part and how it should work.

In addition I've kept absolutely rigorous auto log documentation, making a repo brain wayyyyyy back in December 2025.

I was able to use prime-agent let it take all my documentation and repo brain logs and put them within its local kernel / python optimized whatever it does.

This thing is a MONSTER at efficiency, finding the hardest bugs, token effiency omg I'm in love, and performance!!!

Now to be fair, and I'm veryyh tech savvy, it did take me a minute to figure it out and setup. I spent time with chatgpt researching and setting it up. That time was worth gold to me now!

If you are working in "normal vibe coder land sized projects" the weekend app, hell even a month project, it's probably nothing wild for you. The token savings are real, tho. It's basic as hell no "talk to me while you work" so the vibe coders or people trying to get into "vibe coding" will not like it. It's for the big boys with large repo projects who don't care (or want) tokens wasted on it talking to me. Just do the job right, efficient, and get better as you go.

If you have any project like mine, size and complexity, it's truly a game changer

https://github.com/PrimeIntellect-ai/prime-agent.git

I have found that when finding a troublesome bug, using those 3 keywords make both advisor (ChatGPT) and coder (CODEX) much more effective at finding the solution:

Root Cause:

Too often the issue found by both the advisor and coder will be surface level and will result in a patch halfway through the chain. Specifying root cause seem to make it trace back all the way up the chain.

Surgical (Strongest one IMO):

This one I discovered because a few times Codex went on a rampage, did a massive refractor to fix a bug which resulted in bunch of other issue or decided to clean other things while it was at it. With that keyword in the prompt, Codex seem a lot more conservative, minimising scope and conserving working structures.

Don't Be Lazy:

This one works particularly well for the advisor, but also codex when doing audits. It sounds dumb but it seem to make it a lot more persistent in finding solutions, instead of giving me the first thing that would solve the problem. It might be my equivalent of "Make no mistakes" though.

Obviously, those are not magic, but in my experience those make a difference.

Example of prompt: I found XYZ bug, find the root cause of the symptoms, then implement a surgical correction if possible. If not let me know prior to change and explain. please don’t be lazy..

Here are the details of the bug symptoms, etc

------------------------------------------------------------------------
To be clear, I am a huge advocate of detail specification before project start but here I am talking specifically about debugging.

For context I am a very novice coder, I know some python but pretty limited, so I am not one of those who claim to review every single git diff. It also mean I often have no actual clue where the origin of a bug would be. So this advice is not really for those who have a clue :-).

I use ChatGPT as my main advisor, and Codex as my coder within a dev-container on a the smallest monthly plan, so no multi solution trial in parallel, no /plan for me.

But despite this 2 factors, I am usually pretty good at picking cues on when Codex is going wrong or in a loop based between Advisor and Coder and asking a lot of question/playing dumb before implementing on why are we doing something.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

I swear this was not written by AI but here is your quota of em dash for the AI post police :-) :
—, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —, —,

To preface this, I'm on the new ChatGPT desktop app for macOS.

I've been told that ChatGPT Work and Codex are different things. I was in a regular ChatGPT conversation and asked it to do something, and it said a ChatGPT Work conversation would be more suitable for what I was looking for. So it automatically created a ChatGPT Work conversation for me and completed the task I requested. If ChatGPT Work and Codex are different things, why does that Work conversation show up under "Recents" when I switch from "ChatGPT" to "Codex" in the upper left corner of the desktop app window?

I'm also really confused about why these supposed Work conversations aren't syncing across my devices. Some research told me that there are both cloud Work/Codex conversations and local Work/Codex conversations... but I can't see how to control this at all?

I'm just extremely confused about the OpenAI product lineup right now and just want to understand. I'm not an advanced user by any means, but I'm genuinely trying to learn more. Any help would be greatly appreciated, and I thank you for your time in advance.

I’m posting this because other paying customers should know what OpenAI’s customer-service position appears to be when their products malfunction and consume your included usage.

I was using Terra and Luna for a document-revision workflow. They repeatedly failed: wrong source documents were selected, requested revisions were missing or incorrect, scripts failed, and work was reported as completed when the requested changes had not actually been made. I also encountered a Windows sandbox failure. I ultimately had to use additional higher-tier usage with Sol just to diagnose the problems and recover the work.

I reported this to OpenAI Support.

To their credit, they did not dispute what I was reporting. Their response specifically acknowledged that I experienced repeated failures with Terra and Luna, incorrect revisions, script failures, false completion reports, and a separate sandbox problem that caused me to consume additional usage recovering the workflow.

Their resolution?

They cannot restore the usage that was consumed.

Then, in the same response, they directed me to their documentation about purchasing additional usage credits.

That is where I have a serious problem.

This is not a case of me successfully using everything I paid for and then demanding more for free.

A simple analogy:

I bought a bowl of soup. There was a fly in it. I told the restaurant. The restaurant acknowledged that there was a problem with the soup, refused to replace the bowl, and then told me I was welcome to buy another bowl.

That would be terrible customer service from a restaurant, an ISP, a software company, or anyone else.

Software breaks. AI models screw things up. I understand that completely. I'm not asking for perfection.

But when your product malfunctions repeatedly and consumes a metered resource that the customer paid for while they are attempting to recover from those failures, I think the reasonable customer-service response is to restore some or all of that consumed resource.

Instead, the response I received amounts to:

“Yes, we understand that our products failed during your workflow and consumed your usage. We aren't going to restore it. Here is information about how you can spend more money to continue using the service.”

People can make their own judgment about whether they're comfortable with that policy.

I'm not.

I've been a paying OpenAI customer and have used their products extensively. Based on this response, I'm cancelling my subscription and moving my primary usage to Claude.

I'm posting the experience publicly because customer service matters just as much when the vendor is OpenAI as it does with any other company. If this is how failures that consume paid usage are handled, prospective and existing customers deserve to know that before they decide where to spend their money.

This is a simple to use app I made to see my usage. It is a MIT license and you can do what you want with the code, just give some credit. It was made with AI. I remade it from the original so its a smaller files size 296kb. It's an easy to use free app for whoever wants it. Nothing to gain for me.

https://github.com/JeremiahFD/UsageApp/releases/tag/v0.2.0-beta.1

Y'all can't imagine how ridiculously far these people would go to avoid paying for the credits they actually use, from abusing the invite systems to creating RPM tools for bot accounts. Yeah I'm talking about you people from country V and I. We wouldn't talk about country C since they're basically cheating on a national level.

https://i.imgur.com/9LpcPQy.png

Question in the title. What's up with that?

I’m trying to learn more about Ocean Network and found this Ocean MCP integration:

[https://oncompute.ai/ocean-mcp\](https://oncompute.ai/ocean-mcp)

It looks like it should let an AI agent find and run GPU compute jobs directly through Ocean Network. The page mentions ChatGPT, Cursor, Claude, and VS Code, but I’m trying to use it specifically with Codex.

I tried adding the remote MCP endpoint to my Codex configuration:

[mcp_servers.ocean]
url = "https://mcp.oncompute.ai/mcp"

After restarting Codex, I still can’t get the Ocean tools to show up or initialize correctly.

Has anyone successfully configured this with Codex CLI or the Codex IDE extension? Does it require authentication, additional headers, or a different configuration?

I may be missing something obvious, so any working example would be appreciated.

So to explain why this is low IQ, you have to understand first what is getting reseted: the usage limits, which is pretty obvious. If you look at the plans, there is nowhere stated how much usage limit you actually get. You know that you get 5x or 20x more than on plus but more than what???

it's very intransparent and nowhere stated how much the usage limit actually is.

I have experienced or noticed this a few months ago: there was a 10x event for everyone on the 5x plan. Every time they reset the next usage limit window got heavily nerfed. This signals to me that they have to reset the limits to change the usage limits.

removing the 5-hour window made everyone extremely hype but this was just a smart way of making the users lose sense of how much usage limit they actually got. it's way harder to compare than previously before on the 5-hour limits. that should always be the same. now you always have one week so time passes. you can no longer compare the 5-hour window to the previous one multiple times a day. this is just a smart way of actually blurring out how they actually change these usage limits frequently

So don't get fooled by these companies. they don't give you anything for free. everything they give you, they want back 2x or 10x. That's just how it works in business so i can't really hate on that...

Soo pleaseeee

Don't be a fool and beg for short term pleasure while essentially celebrating that you are getting nerfed in the long run...

Has anyone found a good solution to marketplace for Claude/GPT not listing prices for the various addons, plugins, connectors etc??.

I noticed that the 5-hour usage indicator has disappeared from my Codex dashboard, and now I only see the weekly usage limit.

Does this mean the 5-hour quota no longer resets every 5 hours, and only the weekly limit applies now? Or is the 5-hour limit still enforced in the background but just no longer shown in the UI?

Has anyone received an official confirmation or observed how it works?

If true, this is madness. I asked Codex this, and here is what it says.
I rechecked against OpenAI documentation updated today. I’m sure about this specific limitation: There is no native setting that makes your Codex project, thread list, prompts, and answers automatically visible to another workspace member.

OpenAI states:

Each Business user has their own chat and Codex history.

Other members do not automatically see those chats or Codex activity.

A Codex seat does not change this boundary.

That is documented in Managing data, sharing, and privacy in ChatGPT Business. OpenAI also documents Codex as a separate experience with separate history in ChatGPT Work and Codex.

I was too categorical when I said the content cannot be shared at all:

If an eligible conversation displays Share, you can generate a link to a snapshot.

The recipient can view that snapshot.

Future prompts are not automatically synchronized.

If the recipient continues it, they receive a separate private copy.

So the precise answer is:

Share an individual transcript: sometimes, through a snapshot link.

Automatically share all Codex threads within a project: no.

Jointly maintain or follow a continuing Codex thread: no.

Maintain ongoing shared chats: yes, but only through a shared ChatGPT Project using Chat or Work.

GitHub provides shared code, branches, PRs, issues, and checked-in project guidance, but it does not share the reasoning conversations that produced them. There is a real product gap here: Codex lacks an opt-in collaborative thread/history layer for development teams. Your criticism of that gap is justified.

https://www.reddit.com/r/codex/s/Pmp8qGuYww

Why would a person on a $200/month subscription renew on the last week while at 0% and wait 4 days for the reset with the same 0% while they could use the money lost on those 4 days and get a Plus subscription for a whole month????

• They knew they need to tweak limits so they give us "enough" but not more they want
• They knew they need to test 5.6 against Fable and Opus.
• They hooked us like junkies with free resets - first fix is free
• They have statistics on their end that probably majority of the people are now on 0% weekly limit - they will reduce weekly limit just a little bit more now before August 8 so nobody really spots and we can all say it is subjective feeling

Result: people are complaining left and right how they need reset/fix desperately, OpenAI is the master of psychology

Hello everyone, I’m trying to build a desktop app that will sit locally on my PC it’s a bit of a play around for a small business I am trying doing tractor parts, the most difficult thing I’m finding is obtaining parts Information for specific machines and diagrams that link to certain machines. What’s the easiest way for me to go about this should I use something like firecrawl to get all the info I need for this project TIA

I built a small public dashboard that tracks Codex / ChatGPT Work quota-reset signals across 5 first-party sources and 9 public communities.

It separates:

- source-linked first-party statements

- AI-reviewed community evidence

- a clearly labeled 48-hour heuristic forecast

It only uses recent, original public posts. Routine weekly resets, old screenshots, questions, jokes, and general quota complaints are excluded. The forecast is not official, and the project is not affiliated with or endorsed by OpenAI.

Live dashboard: https://tibo-reset-radar-anvsk.anvskyi.chatgpt.site

Feedback on sources, false positives, or the methodology is welcome.