TechPulseTechPulse
Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

67% Positive

Analyzed from 162 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#updates#harness#small#large#need#codex#sure#why#needs#system

Discussion (6 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

orliesaurus•23 minutes ago
i love the idea, but you also need to maintain it long term: in today's world what is the best practice to do that... do you spin up an agent anytime codex-cli updates and mirror the updates in c++ and push a new release? or idk... set up an automated process that does this on a worker on CF in a sandbox when npm updates @openai/codex?
fractorial•about 2 hours ago
I’m not quite sure why the harness itself needs to be small. Isn’t the system prompt and management of system prompt the bit you want lightweight?
userbinator•about 2 hours ago
"Why does it need to be large?" should be the question instead.
selcuka•30 minutes ago
A harness needs to be good. Being large is annoying, sure, but it's generally not an issue. Unless this one has feature parity with the "large" ones (hint: it doesn't), I don't see any reason to use it only because it's small.
cyanydeez•29 minutes ago
ultimately, the harness is just going to be another model specifically engineered to be deterministic, like ballbearings in a wheel minimizing friction.
K0IN•about 1 hour ago
I think it's nice to have options, but I also don't see the appeal in "sub x mb" (except as codegolf or just for the hacky part, for day to day this does not matter) especially if features are missing or other compromises have been made just for the sake of remaining small.