Where the AI market is talking

Why your local LLM feels dumber than it is

I believe whoever lays down the best structure around LLM will take the lead. Proven in Anthropic vs OpenAI.

Anthropic IPO filing will show AI backlash as a risk factor, sources say

> "Everyone hates us but they can't have enough of us. Our revenue can't stop rising" Anthropic is far from profitable so using Claude makes them lose money. There's a fictional scenario where they make this money back with a huge profit but it's getting very hard to believe this gonna happen.

A Friendly Introduction to Racket

I think you clearly exposed one of the things that I couldn't never describe why I wasn't dragged into Racket/scheme. It's not only annoying is hard to remember all these differences. Obviously the more you use the language these go away but still at least to me it doesn't seem to be a coherent syntax.

A week of using Codex more than Claude

Is he polarizing? Yes, and so are a lot more other people. He is probably comes more stronger. On a personal level, everyone have their own rules, they may not be able to imposing them on others , however they do happen to evaluate their relative understanding of other people based upon those rules. For me personally, I would probably put Anthropic, OpenAI and Grok in the same bucket, they are doing everything possible to make money. Ethics, morals, long term impacts, all of such things are not in their playbook. But again what these companies are doing just reflects the people who invested in them and what they want out of it. In some ways you can say its the money trying to maximize itself at all costs.

A week of using Codex more than Claude

Is he polarizing? Yes, and so are a lot more other people. He is probably comes more stronger. On a personal level, everyone have their own rules, they may not be able to imposing them on others , however they do happen to evaluate their relative understanding of other people based upon those rules. For me personally, I would probably put Anthropic, OpenAI and Grok in the same bucket, they are doing everything possible to make money. Ethics, morals, long term impacts, all of such things are not in their playbook. But again what these companies are doing just reflects the people who invested in them and what they want out of it. In some ways you can say its the money trying to maximize itself at all costs.

Anthropic's best AI model struggles to attract users as cheaper tools thrive

My Recent Visit to Anthropic

A week of using Codex more than Claude

I’ve been using codex more recently, like others here. But one thing I’ve noticed which I find a bit of a red flag: by default you only archive chats. If you go online, it says there’s a location in settings where can delete your archive. But it’s not that obvious where to find, and when I finally find some link, it was literally broken. It said it can’t find any archived chats, even though I archive them all the time. Bit of a red flag for me. Both Anthropic and OpenAI claim that when you delete a chat, it’s gone after some retention period. They’re just words but if they’re secretly training on your traces and you delete your chats, then they would need to break two terms/conditions: ignoring your “train on my data” preference and ignoring your orders to delete chats. So it is an e…

A week of using Codex more than Claude

I’ve been using codex more recently, like others here. But one thing I’ve noticed which I find a bit of a red flag: by default you only archive chats. If you go online, it says there’s a location in settings where can delete your archive. But it’s not that obvious where to find, and when I finally find some link, it was literally broken. It said it can’t find any archived chats, even though I archive them all the time. Bit of a red flag for me. Both Anthropic and OpenAI claim that when you delete a chat, it’s gone after some retention period. They’re just words but if they’re secretly training on your traces and you delete your chats, then they would need to break two terms/conditions: ignoring your “train on my data” preference and ignoring your orders to delete chats. So it is an e…

A week of using Codex more than Claude

It is wild to read stuff like this when it is OpenAI that is being blamed for rug-pulling users and secretly reducing limits. It's such a big mess that Codex's product lead has been frantically posting updates on Twitter about it.

A week of using Codex more than Claude

Ohh this comes in a really good time! I mean personally I'd just like to use OpenCode with all the providers, if their desktop app was a bit more polished and Anthropic wasn't so restrictive. There's also Paseo, but it has some issues with OpenCode sub-agent liveness checks (I've seen them hang, though the same happened with Kepler, might be a GLM 5.3 issue idk). > It felt to me that Codex created a much simpler solution in terms of code architecture than Claude. This feels odd, cause I've seen people say the exact opposite thing, that the GPT 5.x models seem to love overengineering etc. > The output of the Codex agent harness is much more “technical” than the one from Claude. Claude feels more like your colleague in a Tuple session writing to you while Codex feels more like a versi…

A week of using Codex more than Claude

I'm sad that Opus is now considered "solid" and not on par with Sol, since OpenAI supposedly has "Astra" which I thought would be comparable to Fable. It was "amazing" back when I first tried 4.6, but that's just my rose-coloured glasses speaking, I guess. I think I was one of the first few to call out Opus 5 for being hot garbage.

A week of using Codex more than Claude

I'd start by disabling all plugins and MCPs. You'd be surprised how quickly those can annihilate usage and cache coherency

Why aren't my two Cortex-A9 cores cache coherent?

Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

> Where the money is not coming from are consumers. This is 100% wrong. Look at Anthropic's quarterly revenue from AI sales ($11B), OpenAI (6.7B) and XAI ($5B). That's $23B a quarter or $100B annualized. And it's still growing. Inesting $1T when your revenue is 10% annually and growing quickly is not unusual.

Felony charges for citizen deleting phone data at US Border

> Where the money is not coming from are consumers. This is 100% wrong. Look at Anthropic's quarterly revenue from AI sales ($11B), OpenAI (6.7B) and XAI ($5B). That's $23B a quarter or $100B annualized. And it's still growing. Inesting $1T when your revenue is 10% annually and growing quickly is not unusual.

Building an (almost) fully self-hosted, sandboxed, agentic software factory

I've been meaning to write something about how I did it, and have been putting it off for a long time. I wrote all the tools myself - by that, I mean that everything was a web app running in my browser. My advice would be to first set up an automation for yt-dlp to pull the media, then use Whisper to build a transcription pipeline. Chunk the transcript based on desired result granularity, then store embeddings in local Qdrant. It helps to use an orchestrator to handle all of this - my current recommendation is Dagster (dagster.io).

Thinking in Python

Take you and me as an example. When we work, we might start with A, suddenly think of C, briefly jump to D, then B, revise the premise of A, and finally reach a conclusion. Humans think by constantly shifting between association, working memory, emotion, and social judgment. However, when we write, we organize these scattered results into a coherent structure. In other words, our writing is not a raw dump of human thought, but rather a normalized output of human thought arranged in a logical sequence. I believe that in this specific process, LLMs actually have an advantage over humans. Because it operates by continuously appending tokens conditioned on the sequence generated so far: What was just said -> The most natural logical next step -> The most natural logical next step after …

A week of using Codex more than Claude

I have completely moved away from Claude to Codex. OpenAI models are better at following instructions and skill use. Claude generates more code, tries to build things that are not planned or needed, repeats same mistakes over and over. Chatgpt on the other hand just does enough, within a project would not repeat the same mistakes, tries to guess your workflow, so you don’t have to ask it to run the same. If you need more control over your code/projects, if you know what you want to get done, use Codex. If you have no idea what you’re doing and are happy to let LLM drive the thing, use Claude. Codex/Chagpt is for the competent.

A week of using Codex more than Claude

btw, there's a dedicated plugin for similar setup https://github.com/openai/codex-plugin-cc