In my experience, you can often get around this by trying again. I've had prompts that were rejected, but as soon as I started a new session, it worked.
I tricked codex by generating a fake history of it starting working on something and resuming it. Claude knows about that trick and will stop even though it thought it was mid task.
Had a recall reimbursement through Stellantis and couldn’t figure out if it was the best AI I’ve ever spoken to or the most professional human I’ve ever spoken to.
That still sounds like it would be the company’s fault. If I asked it to hack a nuclear reactor, maybe it would be different. I’m also thinking about instances where OpenAI’s own test models escaped their own sandboxes — I would expect them to be responsible for the damages they caused.
The correct analogy is playing Russian roulette. The company says "you can pull the trigger but sometimes a bullet will come out" (see: "an AI can make mistakes"). However, is the company allowed to sell such a dangerous device, under these terms?
I’m 45 and work out a lot and feel this way without creatine. To the point that this makes me worry it would exacerbate my existing sleep issues (I literally never feel sleepy, I feel exactly the same 24 hours a day).
I had this experience as well, but after rewriting my agent instructions it has been far better. I believe Astra’s “token efficiency” translates to “don’t research as much” which caused it to make poorly informed architectural decisions.
Most coding via Opus 5.5.
Codex for text and some non-coding tasks.
Separate virtual desktop and clone on dev drive with VScode for each task (much prefer its diff tool and use it to launch builds etc).
I never come close to running out of tokens because I still do code reviews often enough to throttle usage.
reply