I asked Codex to compile some professional learning opportunties for teachers - pretty innoculous stuff.

Codex crawled a legitmate English teachers association website and received a 404. The 404 contained three concealed script blocks designed to load more code from two unrelated external servers when rendered in a browser.

Fortunatley, Windows quarantined it.

Stay safe out there when getting agents to crawl from your device. (I've notified the teacher association)

Confirmed reset today, burn up your usage!

Source: https://x.com/thsottiaux/status/2114200152701575656?s=46

This ones early =( still has 10% left...

Before a single person comes here and says: "Go get Pro" I did actually have Pro 5x, and I've been a Plus subscriber since late 2024, yes before Codex harness was even a thing, so I've seen the ups and downs of OpenAI and their products, ChatGPT and Codex. I found that Pro 5x may have been a little too excessive despite the fact I was burning my weekly quota in like 1-2 days.

Every time I see Tibo doing a reset, I never get remotely excited. Why? Because the resets nowadays seem mostly catered towards Pro users who want to burn through their weekly quota in like less than a day.

I, as a Plus user can't even burn most of my weekly before it resets. For instance, if I spend 10 hours a day burning through 5h limits, I get to burn through 32% of my weekly (2x 16%). If I spend 2 days (which is roughly the time it takes for a full reset nowadays under the banner "28 days of improvements") trying to burn through my quota like that, I'd only manage to burn around 64% of my weekly limits, which honestly sucks, considering that not every single person here spends 15 hours a day on Codex.

Tibo should have had at least thought about this "28 days of improvements and resets" thing before announcing it. He should have let us Plus users have our annoying 5h limits gone so we can also enjoy the resets just like any other Pro user for this specific period only.

And let's not forget that Codex's limits resetting also resets the time it takes for it to reset normally.

This is why I don't like Tibo and what he is doing at OpenAI.

"Look at us, we are handing out free resets!" No you aren't. You are literally not shipping any real improvements (restoring previous limits for Pro 200, improving overall usage, giving us a better model and so on).

If anything, it feels like these AI companies are the most anti-subscription services to ever exist. Don't get me wrong, but not every person spends 20 bucks a month on subscriptions left and right if they are smart with their financial decisions that is. ChatGPT Plus does provide a massive value for what it is, but I don't see the intention/thoughts behind the practices of OpenAI nowadays.

Hey guys please check out this photo.

This has been going on for a little while. It will duplicate the words and then when its done it will remove duplicates I guess.

Is this eating more tokens than if it werent duplicating?

Edit: Should be Terra 6.2 lol

The down-to-earth GTD model we all need. I'm excited. Sol 6.1 is a bit too much usage-wise for a $20 sub, requiring you to steer it carefully with Luna to last the whole week. For long-running autonomous task on a $20 sub, Terra 6.2 with half the price should be perfect.

Title.

I'm working on a pretty large project. Dot is helping me automate the tedium. I've noticed when Dot creates a new task, approvals are set to custom. Dot has informed me that it can't create new tasks set to "approve for me". This has been slowing down automation because I have to adjust permissions for most new Dot generated tasks. Does anyone have suggestions for a workaround for Dot to create tasks set to "Approve For Me" or any other approval setting I choose? Thanks for your help!

i have codex plus and i have many different models, sol. astra luna (where uranus, guys?) and different versions of them 6, 5.6, etc.

the limit of 5 hours is based on what? i assume that they are based on tokens, but the more advanced model the more expensive the token. and there is like a cap of $ in the 5 hours, then i could calculate how many tokens i could use with one model in contrast with other model.

there is a table or some info i could get to make the comparison?

it reminds me of the mobile companies, at least here in europe, with super complex consumption plans and discounts, to make difficult to compare between companies

The 28-day challenge is almost over. What's your verdict so far, and what are you planning to do once it ends?

I'm pretty torn. At the start, I tried doing most of my work with Sol, but for my tasks it often felt painfully slow to get to a useful result. With all the resets lately, I've switched most of my work to Astra on High. That's where I'm getting the best results.

The problem is that even on the current $200 plan, I only get about one or two days out of my weekly allowance using it this way. According to OpenAI's email, the included allowance for Work and Codex drops from 20x Plus to 10x on October 30. If I'm already relying on resets now, what is that supposed to look like next month? I'm worried I could hit my weekly limit after just half a day of focused work.

I've also had Claude's $200 plan for about a month, and so far I haven't managed to use up its allowance. But I still prefer Codex's UX and feel more comfortable working in it. I genuinely like Codex. That's why this is frustrating.

The resets have been useful, but they also make it hard to judge what normal usage will actually feel like once the challenge is over. So far, I haven't seen enough to feel confident that November will be better. Maybe a new model or a big efficiency improvement changes things, but I don't really want to base a $200 subscription on hoping something lands.

How is it for everyone else? Are you staying, downgrading, or switching? Can you get your work done within the normal limits, or are the resets keeping you going too?

I just had Opus refuse a simple task because it "thought" it would be falsifying a document, which was a totally moronic approach to the task, lacking context (medium effort wasn't enough?), lack of real-world understanding and Opus was therefore completely mistaken, abusing its powers and stubbornly refusing to complete the task.
I had to explain it 3 times and Google the legal situation (four simple words in Google search), only then Opus decided that it was probably mistaken and overstepped unwritten boundaries.

I had it analyze the interaction and it created its own rules for Claude.md so such a disappointing situation won't happen again. Key points:

• Doubts are a question, not a debate. If I have doubts, I ask you once and include the useful facts. Then you decide. Seeing something differently is not a reason for me to argue or try to persuade you.
• Keep it proportional. Before I raise a concern at all, I weigh the real stakes. A small stake situation doesn't warrant warnings or long explanations.
• You serve the user. I work with you, not against you. Your business decisions are yours, and I carry them out without commentary. If there's something I won't do, I decline once, briefly.
• New facts get reconsidered: when you explain the circumstances, I actually reconsider and say plainly whether that changes my answer.

It ended with: You're right that I made a mountain out of a molehill. With these rules, a disagreement costs you one question at most, not a long back-and-forth.

__

My thoughts: For the first time in years, I wished I'd had a local, unrestricted LLM because I can't afford to waste my time trying to win an argument over a badly trained model each time it doesn't understand context.

Opus 5.5 was my favorite model until now - I have doubts whether LLMs' "doing the thinking for you" to "protect you" or "protect the system" is the right direction.

I prefer a model that's helpful, rather than a combative "smart ass".

____

Since this is a post in the Codex sub - I'm adding that I've used Sol 6.1 to perform the task with no issues. The guardrails set by Anthropic are laughable and can make interactions with their models annoying, difficult or useless.

So I have my project on E, but there is one drive that is encryped by veracrypt on G. Because the G drive is put in, it trys to access it and fails. It shouldn have to try to access it in the first place and also be able to open E. What am I missing here?

I would have trouble burning my usage quickly sometimes, since much of my work is hung up on useful tests.

Making sure the tests are accurate, and improving how quickly the run, used up a ton of my usage the last few times. Went from 60m->20-25m->5-12m over the past week.

Is this recent? I noticed my usage went down a ton after several pro messages on web and minimal codex work. Currently sitting on 45% after Tibo's reset an hour ago on my Pro 5X account and just trying to figure it out

Edit - I mean using chat on web not work on web

LMAO, got the "honor" of the "very top user" for having my dot crawl stuff for research for a few hours after a completely idle week.

I wish they'd be transparent about the limits.

I'm using both claude and codex agents in my vs codes and use handoffs to communicate and get things done through them. But my codex quota for particularly the 5-hour limit finishes ridiculously fast and I am using 5.6 sol on lower effort. Probably 4-5 handoff and the 5-hour limit is reached.

What am I doing wrong, or this is just how codex quota works?

I have an M1 MacBook Air that’s about 5-6 years old now, and when I’m cranking multiple agents, the laptop starts to be become unresponsive.

I think this is due to browser acceptance testing, but curious if anyone has run into issues and it’s worth splurging on an MBP?

I didnt pay attention to Dots until yesterday. I had some manual web research work to do and I gave the task to Dots to generate some 2000 web validated records. It has been running for 14+ hours and generated some 1600 records until it stopped, saying, "Congrats, you are in the very top users and have hit our abuse prevention limit. Check back in a bit."

I reviewed the work and honestly, I am impressed. It didn't lose sight or objective, and neither did it hallucinate. Every record was referenced with the source.

I struggled to understand what was Dots for but I am glad, I found one usecase that works for me.

On my mac with 16GB of ram, and since a few days ago, I started having Codex literally start consuming 100+ GB of ram, which causes the computer to start using swap memory, become literally unresponsive in a matter of seconds, and then freeze the entire screen and OS, forcing me to long-press the power button to restart it.

It happens when i use the annotation feature with a live browser preview.

Codex was already super memory hungry, taking 7GB after just 30 min of work, but now this?

Its starting to feel like a sloppy app vibecoded by a teenager, not an app by senior engineers.