Seeing a lot of complaints about fast draining usage on X.

This crap hasn’t changed at all since Sol 5.6.

Constant over-engineered garbage.

Anything I let it touch is just this same type of trash over and over.

It’s unbelievably bad.

“The review has now confirmed duplication: the roughly 19-minute host preparation test mostly repeats the unchanged legacy preparation route and does not exercise the new resume route. Several other host checks also replay unchanged code.

That is exactly the overlap I should have identified earlier. I'm keeping those runs held while checking how the existing gate can reuse their valid evidence and require the actual new resume boundary.”

Every single F’ing thing it builds on its own has redundant check after redundant check. This is just ONE part of a STARTUP process that it turned from a 30 second operation into something that runs for over an hour on a machine with 180 threads and 700gb of RAM.

They need to dump these garbage “cyber” models they’re using as the foundation. They absolutely suck for any practical use case.

I’m completely done. I hope they don’t give us anymore resets because that’s the only reason I haven’t cancelled my two 20x accounts.

I’ve used both Claude and Codex simultaneously since the beginning and I really, really dislike Anthropic, but Claude is like a breath of fresh air compared to this codex dumpster fire that they want us to pay 2x more for, for half the usage.

Get real. I’m out.

REAL TIME UPDATE: Jesus, this just gets better and better:

"The first removals are in the working tree: 47 duplicate image-build admissions and three redundant commands in the launch sequence. The retrain review also found producers that fully reread an artifact immediately after renaming its already-validated staging directory. I'm reviewing those fixes now; production remains stopped."

I just cancelled, I am not dealing with this anymore.

& driving them in droves out of the openai ecosystem. Its doing it for me.

I have a small training company that often works with immigrants and ESOL clients. lately I have seen a shift in the emails that are obviously generated using AI. And that's standard across the board. So that's not a problem IMO It is what it is.

However, recently our company had to cancel a class and about 3 clients didn't get the cancellation notification. And didn't check the website where we prominently posted it for two weeks ahead of time.

I got three emails that you would have thought they were written by my supervisors. Obviously AI generated, three sections one complaining about the cancelation and asking for a refund. (Which we had already given them) a second section was requesting compensation for any transportation costs they spent that day. We were already prepared to do that, but they asked for us to document how we would compensate them for their time and travel.

And then lastly (as per AI) a very long paragraph asking us to forward them our files as proof that we had actually emailed people, documentation and a game plan of how we were going to resolve this issue going forward. Please explain how we were planning on process improvements to resolve this communication flaw in our company.

The last one was so freakin' offensive and "Karen" that we just laughed. I do not owe you an explanation beyond I am sorry and a simple explanation. Two of them had signed up with their boyfriend's credit card information and so that's where the email went.

It just occurred to me that they likely have no idea how over the top these emails come across. And someone with poor language skills thinks that this is helping them seem powerful or professional when it's actually having the opposite effect. I also wondered if they feel like AI is giving them a "peek into the world of the elite" and they honestly think this is how rich people talk to each other.

I feel like this is setting up a bubble that's going to burst in about six months when professionals and supervisors get sick of it. And people are going to basically tune out any email that's written this way. But it's also giving these people a ridiculous perspective in how the world really works. And since AI is sycophantic it's going to bolster them into even more outrageous thinking.

For example, in the past they would have sent angry emails, I would have apologized, refunded their money and offered them another free class to compensate them for their time and travel. It would have been appreciated as good business. This weekend doing the same thing got me begrudging acceptance as if they had done nothing wrong and I was doing the bare minimum. It kind of annoyed me.

It's one thing to use AI to guide or even write a whole email. But this is over the top extra that's going to blow up in their face IMO. I wonder if we're going to see a backlash. Has anyone else noticed this?

I recommend watching the whole interview, but for me, the most puzzling part was why they wanted OpenAI to stay away. He actually explains it quite reasonably (6:17 to 9:12)

Where people don't complain all the time but post actual nice stuff. TIA.

I seriously can't wait to see what the next few months have in store, hope they'll get to practical applications soon

After the last reset, I went from 100% to 0% within in a day and since then used about 30k in credits. My workflow is mostly Astra running Sol 6.1 subagents, both in thinking High. Anybody else experiencing similar stuff?

Over the past week the throughput has dropped down to the same speed as Fast, which is only about ~65 tok/s. I have been working on a feature that enables paid "high priority" processing of requests by routing them to the Ultrafast endpoint, but I can't rely on that if OpenAI can't keep their speeds consistent, or even distinct across service tiers.

Is anyone else dealing with this?

long story short because there was an essay here.

— sike — GPT — summarized — that — too

5.5/5.6 were actually useful work models for me in Chat. I’d dump context, structure prompts for Codex, let them reason through stuff, and because they could get pretty damn verbose, I’d just keep the conversation going and use Chat to summarize and organize the mess

6 Sol feels like they found a way to keep Chat “unlimited” while making it barely useful for serious work

colors, annotations, APPROVED, DONE, little visual stuff everywhere... cool. I just need it to hold context and structure a proper thought

even with Thinking, sometimes it feels like it starts from some instant first take and then spends the rest of the answer following that direction. if the first assumption is wrong, you start getting contradictions and have to make it re-check everything from scratch

5.6 used to actually sit there and think. and lately even that feels nerfed. stuff that could take 7–10 minutes inspecting a zip or working through something now seems allergic to going much past ~3 min

I already use Codex for the heavy lifting and I’m happy to pay for that. I just don’t want Chat itself to become the pretty colorful front-end that I can’t trust for basically anything serious, even just checking data or information

hopefully whatever 6.1-based thing eventually lands in Chat brings some of that back

You’re out of Codex and Work usage
Your rate limit resets at 5:02 AM. Upgrade or use one of your rate limit resets now.

(I swear this is literally what made me write this post out of boredom)

hey everyone :)

following situation: i’m a biology student and i would like to submit my notes and the lecture slides somewhere in order for it to be turned not only into flashcards but also into like exams, tests and quizzes.
basically i would love an interactive way to study the exact contents form my lectures :)
i don’t really ever use ai but i think (especially when looking at others who have so much experience with ai) it might be really beneficial for me to start using it.

sooo now i’m trying to figure out what to do.
the free chatgpt model itself is pretty limited when it comes to media, so are claude and basically any other basic ai.

my question is: do any of you know any free ai study tools that you’d reccomend?
and if not: should just buy chatgpt plus and then use that (plus then get access to astra and i could use it for anything else) or should i buy a subscription for a specific model designed to be a study tool.

thank you so much for reading this and maybe replying !!

My dot is reviewing PRs (unprompted) by reading my gmail and responding in our chat session since it doesn’t have Github access. (Public repo)

It does seem to find more sophisticated security bugs than Opus 5.5.

And the fact that it did this unprompted shows how much it has been trained to care (weights?) about security.

I just found it interesting.

Common Sense Media’s Youth AI Safety Institute rated ‘ChatGPT for Teens’ as an Unacceptable Risk in their 2026 October report. 

An executive director of the Institute said:

“ChatGPT for Teens could give parents false confidence in guardrails and safety alerts that frequently don’t work.” 

I encourage every parent to read their findings here: commonsensemedia.org/pr…

Meanwhile, it was announced this week that 8 US states (!) are suing OpenAI alleging the ChatGPT maker’s technology is harmful for children.

Unlike people working in AI, who are intimately familiar with the strange nature of LLMs, there are millions and millions of people who interact with different LLMs on a daily basis who aren’t. 

They may not know that ChatGPT (or Claude, Grok, Gemini) will confidently tell them things that aren’t true, are unaware of their biases, or how the model promotes or discourages agency, autonomy, or personal decision-making.

That’s why we need Nutrition Labels for LLMs (you can find a link to the research paper by MIT Media Lab in the full article):

https://jurgengravestein.substack.com/p/why-large-language-models-need-nutrition?r=6ilodi&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web