Within one week, I subscribed to the 100, 200 and 500 plans. The chart shows the maximum usage I reached, including some resets.

I submitted this to the support desk, and they asked for proof. That is strange, since they have the usage statistics and I don’t. Under their process, the burden of proof falls on me alone, yet ChatGPT offers no reliable way to check usage. So I had another AI system count my usage, and the result was shocking. I sent that information to OpenAI. They replied that it was not enough proof and asked me to try again.

In practice, I am dealing with an automated system whose main purpose seems to be to send me away again. My work has been halted as a result. I would like to know whether other people have had the same experience, so that we can gather more evidence together.

Case Number: 17239*** (* for security)

I had a Steam copy of Star Trek Legends sitting there unplayable after its servers shut down. Steam wouldn't refund me, so I thought I was out of luck.

Tonight I asked GPT-6 Astra whether an offline patch would be possible, and it actually got it working.

I uploaded a couple of DLLs, the game’s log, and some asset files. It inspected them and found that the game already contained local gameplay systems, mission data, and saving functionality, but online requests were blocking startup.

It made a patch, which got me into the menu. Clicking Continue still brought up a connection error, but hilariously, the game was running behind the popup.

I sent GPT the new log. Turns out that new connection error was the game trying to connect to its online chat service. It disabled that startup request in a second patch, and the popup disappeared.

I’ve now played, quit, reopened the game, and loaded my progress.

It also packaged the changes into a Windows EXE with Install and Restore buttons, version checks, backups, and source code.

I haven't extensively tested it yet. I haven’t played through the whole game or explored every menu, but I think this is super cool for game preservation! The fact I played multiple missions in a game that I purchased and has been sunset by the developers. And it only took GPT like 30 minutes of back-and-forth!

The below screenshot is what happens if you boot it straight from Steam, and some after the Astra patch:

We all know ChatGPT is great for coding, writing emails, and summarizing text. But every now and then, I use it for a niche, unexpected problem and it completely blows me away.

What is an unconventional, highly specific, or surprisingly clever way ChatGPT has actually made your life easier?

Looking for inspiration and unique use cases!

According to Brazilian media reports, a ChatGPT user allegedly discussed killing Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, asked about the possible legal consequences, and shared an image of a potential attack location. OpenAI flagged the conversation as a serious threat and reported it to Brazil’s Federal Police.

thanks OpenAI for this masterpiece

for the last 3 and a half months i've been "developing" this operating system for fun

i created it because i've always liked trying out operating systems, and i always liked the idea of having my own, but of course, i barely know anything about programming, and even less about making something as complex as a complete os on my own, so using only codex (and patches with chatgpt when i ran out of usage) i managed to create my own os!

it has smp, ring 3, paging, its own 32 bit kernel (and a little bit for arm32 but that part got kinda abandoned)

and most importantly, wine support through a posix layer and linux abis, although it's still pretty slow when loading, i managed to install and use programs like photoshop 4, office 97, winzip 8/9, quake2 and fifa 2000 (although the last one has broken polygons because the virtio graphics doesn't accelerate it very well)

the github is here if you wanna try it
https://github.com/luqui10alcaraz-prog/BlesKernOS

Disclaimer: this isn't really a rant or me asking for help. I just wonder if anyone else feels that way.

So I'm getting increasingly confused by the ChatGPT/Codex/Work split and to me it feels like the division is actually getting worse.

Simple example: if I make a ChatGPT project and do not add a local folder, it becomes a cloud project which isn't visible from Codex but is visible in Work and on the ChatGPT website. If instead I create the project through Codex, I can either manually add a local folder or it'll automatically create one. This project will then be visible from ChatGPT Desktop and Work, but not on ChatGPT web.

To make things even more confusing, I can then add a cloud environment to the Codex project which pulls the project-specific setup from GitHub and *can* work online. And now they announced that Work cloud projects can also use your local files if the pc is online.

I guess it works, and it on some level also makes sense from a technical point of view, but I still find myself project hunting quite frequently or starting a project without a local folder attached, just to later figure out that there doesn't seem to be an easy way to turn it into a local project Work and Codex can use. Not to mention the amount of times I'm simply on the wrong tab.

What do you think: skill issue or just a fragmented app experience right now?

blueviperai@facebook

The idea was to represent humanity in 100 images, as if we were sending them into space to be found by aliens. Cave paintings, iconic art, moon landings, human feelings and historic moments all ended up in the video.

ChatGPT orchestrated the workflow, with Gemini 4 Argon as the generator. Every frame is rendered with JavaScript and p5.brush. Claude handled editing and syncing the video to music generated with Suno.

Some images take a moment to recognize. How many can you spot, and what would you have included? Watch with audio.

Wow

I was a paying subscriber for about a year ($20 plan).

Upgraded to $100.

5 days later my account got deactivated.

No warning emails.

Opened ChatGPT in the morning → login → “account deactivated.”

Lost all chats, data, and API balance.

Filed an appeal.

Support replied with no explanation at all (screenshot below).

They never told me the reason.

Just took the money and locked everything.

Has anyone dealt with this? Any way to get a real response or refund?

The funny part is that the first version of Cohestry was prototyped while I was out walking. I used ChatGPT Work with Astra 6 to turn the idea into an actual project, then when I got home I opened it in Xcode expecting the usual cleanup. It compiled, launched, and the basic functionality worked on the first try.

That prototype eventually became Cohestry, a Markdown library and second brain that connects related notes, resurfaces old ideas, and visualizes the whole library as a 3D graph. Claude opus 5.5 implemented the 3d brain feature. I built it mainly because I wanted one persistent place for project context instead of constantly rebuilding the same background across different agents.

The iPhone app is live now, and somehow Apple approved it on the first review. Mac is coming shortly with Apple Notes import and an MCP bridge for Claude, Codex and other agents.
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/cohestry-second-brain/id6811573132
https://cohestry.app

Edit: the Mac app just got approved as well so you can import your apple notes and use the built in mcp bridge. My very first Mac app. https://apps.apple.com/us/app/cohestry-second-brain/id6811573132

judging by its fucking answers it really doesn't look like it though and that's pissing me off

I've been using coding agents in two different ways, and I'm curious how common my current workflow is.

At work, I originally used Amazon Q Developer directly, giving it instructions myself.

Later, for a personal project, I asked ChatGPT how I should work with Codex. ChatGPT suggested a workflow where I discuss tasks with it first, have it prepare detailed instructions for Codex, and then bring the results back to ChatGPT for review and further discussion.

I started using this ChatGPT → Codex → ChatGPT loop, and it seemed to work well.

So I tried applying the same approach at work, using Copilot as the conversational layer and Amazon Q Developer as the coding agent. I felt similar benefits there too.

One advantage is that the conversational AI turns my rough intentions into more specific instructions. This seems to reduce the chances of the coding agent heading in an unintended direction. It also helps prepare more detailed verification steps after implementation.

But I've found this approach particularly useful for investigating bugs, rather than just writing code.

The clues needed to solve a problem aren't always in the source code that the coding agent can access. They might be in external logs, my own notes, or information I've gathered from elsewhere.

In those cases, discussing the broader problem with a conversational AI, then asking it to direct the coding agent to investigate specific parts of the code, seems to make it easier to reach an answer.

I didn't invent this workflow. ChatGPT suggested it when I asked how to use coding agents, and I've simply continued using it because it seems effective.

Is this a common way of working? What advantages or disadvantages have you experienced compared with interacting directly with a coding agent?

I'm particularly interested in whether others find it useful for debugging and investigation, where the relevant information is spread across multiple sources.

I've been obsessed with doing an interactive roleplay on chatgpt for almost a year now. The thing is, I want it to work only on chatgpt and on my phone. It's like a hyperfocus I have and I can't let go of. I've gone through hundreds of character sheets, story reboots, rule modifications, etc. But lately I've been feeling so down; I solve one problem, everything works fine for a few days, and then another problem appears again.

I no longer know how to create character sheets so that chatgpt doesn't make them soft.

And we're not talking about a dark romance, it's a romance story with characters who can be intense and different from human morality (they are not human) but they never fall into harmful attitudes. They are not jealous, they are not violent with the protagonist, nor do they cross the boundaries she sets.

The point is that the AI still softens them

And it doesn't let them move towards romance and leaves them stuck in the eternal phase of being "friends".

I've tried multiple roleplay rules and nothing works, If a rule solves a specific problem, AI soon turns that rule into a problem in itself. For example, I once had to make a rule to prevent using a certain character as the default for all scenes. Now the Al simply never uses it unless I bring it.

Other problems include the writing style, the excessive emphasis on the dangers of an antagonist's actions or words (it practically highlights what the character is doing). The use of excuses, conveniences, etc., to allow the main character to escape a tense situation. Etc

I've been feeling really down these past few days I feel like I've invested a lot of time and energy in something that I used to find very fun, but that has gradually stopped being fun because I spend more time solving problems than playing the story.

If you have any tips or experience making a long roleplay story work, please leave your advice.

(By long roleplay story, we mean I've been on the last one for over a month and I'm not even halfway through the story. It's almost like reading a long novel.)

Already down to 60% weekly usage in like 2 hours after using a reset. I'm using only two chats in codex, one with Astra medium and one with 6.1 Sol.

Until today I could have like 6 chats of Astra/Sol running in parallel for a few hours, and it would burn only like 10%. Doing way more complex stuff.

Seems like every prompt now takes 5% of my weekly usage. Woke up this morning to my usage depleted, thought nothing of it, and used a reset. But now I'm feeling a bit suspicious?

Anyone experiencing something similar?

Formula Cat started with this prompt:

I want to make a racing game about cats driving roomabs. Can you make a model of a cat riding on a roomba and show it to me on a localhost? Bonus points if you can animate it.

Now it has 22 cats, 11 teams, 31 circuits, and battery-swap pit stops. You play as Mochi, a rookie cat trying to win a championship on a racing vacuum.

I wanted the cats to be ridiculous, but the racing to take itself seriously. You need to brake for corners, find opportunities to overtake, and decide when to pit.

Here is how I’ve been building it with Astra.

Most of my prompts came from playing a build and finding something wrong. The first cat looked like it was vibrating:

the animations of the cat don't look very good. It just looks like its vibrating, the tail especially. Can we add some tail movement?

Handling went through the same process:

the handling needs work. It needs to handle more like a car, so I need to slow down for corners.

Once driving felt better, it became obvious the opponents were too slow. This prompt helped more than another request to “make them better”:

ok, I want to drive a race, and you record lap times for me and the cats, and then tell me why they lag behind so badly

That led to lap-recording tools and specific fixes. Some opponents lost time in traffic. Others made a steering decision, then braked to correct the problem they had just created.

For pit stops, I described what I wanted to physically do:

instead of pitting being a button, you need to mark which pit box is mine, and if I stop on it, replace the battery, then send me on my way.

Now you drive into the pits, stop in your marked box, and a robot arm swaps the battery. Teammates share a box, so arriving together can cost you time.

The current game uses JavaScript and Three.js, packaged in Electron for Steam. I asked for a data-oriented structure, with race state in preallocated typed arrays and simulation separate from rendering. That lets us run races without graphics to investigate lap times and opponent behavior.

We also built an offline racing-line optimizer with Python, CasADi, and IPOPT. The resulting lines still needed testing with the game’s actual physics and driving controller.

My favorite testing failure: two banked corners on the Nordschleife leaned the wrong way, but the test passed. The implementation and test shared the same incorrect sign convention.

Formula Cat is now on Steam. Wishlists are appreciated!

Happy to go into more detail about the opponent driving, track tools, or prompts.

Just curious if anyone's chat is being argumentative? I know the recent update to 6 caused it to start with the never ending follow up questions so I've been switching back to 5.6 (the questions wouldn't stop even though I gave 6 specific instructions to stop). But now I find that it's fighting me on everything. Every conversation seems to start with it soft disagreeing with me. It keeps rephrasing/reframing what I am saying and asking me to consider other irrelevant options. For example(simplified):

"Hey, Robot. What's the best flea shampoo that I can buy at Petsmart?"

Robot "I'd recommend anti-flea 5000 (for reasons). BUT have you considered that it's contact dermatitis from your laundry soap on the dog bedding causing the itching?"

"No. I literally saw a flea."

Robot "Well, just because you saw a flea doesn't mean that's what is causing the dog to itch. I would wash all bedding in hypoallergenic soap, shave both dogs, make an appointment with an animal allergist, and remove every fabric surface in the house."

🫩

It's so weird and noticable and honestly kind of annoying. Does anyone have any good prompts to get it to just answer the question at hand? Obviously this example was a simplified interaction. I didn't ask it "why" my dog was itchy but it still seemed to want to give me a bunch of information and advice that I wasn't asking for.