Simon Willison's Weblog: gpt

DOOMQL

2026-07-13T22:34:41+00:00

Peter Gostev built this using GPT-5.6 Sol. This is a lot of fun:

DOOMQL started with a deliberately unreasonable question: what if SQLite were the game engine, not merely the place where a game stores data?

The result is a small, original Doom-like game in which SQL owns movement, collision, enemies, combat, progression and every RGB pixel on screen.

It's implemented as a Python terminal script - I tried it out like this:

cd /tmp
git clone https://github.com/petergpt/doomql
cd doomql
uv run host/doomql.py

Here's the huge SQL query that implements a full ray tracer in SQLite using a recursive CTE.

Running the above script creates a /tmp/doomql/.doomql/doomql.sqlite SQLite database, which you can explore using Datasette like this:

uvx --prerelease=allow  --with datasette-apps datasette \
  /tmp/doomql/.doomql/doomql.sqlite \
  -p 4444 --root --secret 1 --internal internal.db

The --with datasette-apps option installs the new Datasette Apps plugin, which supports creating custom HTML+JavaScript apps that can run SQL queries directly within the Datasette interface.

I created a new app, pasted the copy-paste prompt into Claude chat (Fable 5) and told it:

Build an app that displays the current state of the screen using the frame_pixels view with its x, y, r, g, b columns. have it refresh once a second.

This got me a working HTML+JavaScript app inside Datasette that could reflect the current state while I played the game in my terminal. Then I added:

add a minimap

And now my Datasette App looks like this:

Here's the HTML app code - paste that into your own Datasette instance (using the uvx --with datasette-apps recipe from above) to try it yourself.

Via @petergostev

Tags: games, sql, sqlite, ai, datasette, generative-ai, llms, ai-assisted-programming, gpt, datasette-apps

Fable gets another bump

2026-07-12T21:20:07+00:00

One of the consequences of GPT-5.6 Sol being clearly a Fable/Mythos class model is that Anthropic have, once again, bumped the date that Fable stops being available in their Claude Max plans:

We're extending Claude Fable 5 access on all paid plans, as well as keeping Claude Code’s weekly rate limits 50% higher, through July 19.

As before, you can use up to half of your weekly usage limit on Fable 5. After that, you can continue using Fable 5 with usage credits, or switch to another model to keep working within your remaining limits.

Anthropic's original rationale for this was compute constraints - they wanted a better idea of both demand and compute availability before committing to keeping the new model cheap for subscribers.

OpenAI appear confident that they won't need to restrict access to GPT-5.6 in the same way. Here's Thibault Sottiaux this morning:

The last 48 hours of Codex and ChatGPT Work have been intense! Three important updates:

Temporarily removing the 5 hour usage limit restriction for all Plus, Business and Pro plans

Rolling out changes that will make GPT 5.6 Sol more efficient across the board and that will be reflected in less usage being used so that it can take you further. Exact impact to be quantified and shared

We hit 6M active users, and are landing a usage reset in the next hour

At this point I think Anthropic should change track and keep Fable permanently available on those plans. OpenAI are winning users simply due to the uncertainty that surrounds Fable access.

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, anthropic, llm-pricing, gpt, claude-mythos-fable

github-code Web Component

2026-07-07T16:18:16+00:00

Tool: github-code Web Component

An experimental Web Component built using GPT-5.5 and the following prompt:

let's build a Web Component for embedding code from GitHub

<github-code href="https://github.com/simonw/sqlite-ast/blob/437c759129154f05296324a7f82aa1246340dd14/sqlite_ast/parser.py#L9-L18"></github-code>

It takes URLs like that, converts them to https://raw.githubusercontent.com/simonw/sqlite-ast/437c759129154f05296324a7f82aa1246340dd14/sqlite_ast/parser.py, then uses fetch() to fetch them and displays the specified range of lines - with line numbers, no syntax highlighting though

Show me a preview web browser so I can see your work

Here's what it looks like embedded on this page:

Tags: github, web-components, gpt

sqlite-utils 4.0rc3

2026-07-06T05:40:08+00:00

Release: sqlite-utils 4.0rc3

I hoped to release sqlite-utils 4.0 stable this weekend, but as I worked through the backlog of issues and PRs with a combination of Claude Fable 5 and GPT-5.5 the changelog since rc2 kept getting bigger.

The biggest new feature is support for introspecting and creating compound foreign keys - a feature that involves a subtle breaking change to table.foreign_keys and hence needed to land for the 4.0 stable release.

sqlite-utils also now follows SQLite's convention for case insensitive column names, which turned out to touch a bunch of different places at once.

Tags: projects, sqlite, sqlite-utils, annotated-release-notes, gpt, claude-mythos-fable

sqlite-utils 4.0rc2, mostly written by Claude Fable (for about $149.25)

2026-07-05T01:00:48+00:00

I wrote about the sqlite-utils 4.0rc1 release a couple of weeks ago. Since we only have Claude Fable on our Max subscriptions for a few more days, I decided to see if it could help me get to a 4.0 stable release that I felt truly comfortable about, since I try to keep to SemVer and like my incompatible major versions to be as rare as possible.

I started with this prompt, in Claude Code for web on my iPhone:

Final review before shipping a stable 4.0 release - very important to spot any last minute things that would be a breaking change if we fix them later

Here's that initial report it created for me. There were some significant problems that I hadn't myself encountered yet - 5 that Fable categorized as "release blockers". Here's the worst of the bunch:

1. delete_where() never commits and poisons the connection (data loss)

Table.delete_where() (sqlite_utils/db.py:2948) runs its DELETE via a bare self.db.execute() with no atomic() wrapper — compare Table.delete() at db.py:2944, which wraps correctly. The connection is left in_transaction=True, so every subsequent atomic() call takes the savepoint branch (db.py:430-440) and never commits either.

Reproduced end-to-end:
db = sqlite_utils.Database("dw.db")
db["t"].insert_all([{"id": i} for i in range(3)], pk="id")
db["t"].delete_where("id = ?", [0])   # conn.in_transaction is now True
db["t"].insert({"id": 50})
db["u"].insert({"a": 1})
db.close()
# Reopen: rows are [0, 1, 2] — the delete, row 50, AND table u are all gone.

That's a really bad bug! Very glad I didn't ship that, although at least it would have been a bug I could fix in a 4.0.1 point release, not a design flaw that would force a 5.0.

Over the course of 37 prompts, 34 commits and +1,321 -190 code changes over 30 separate files, we worked through the entire set of feedback in turn, making several other design improvements along the way.

A weird thing about coding agents is that harder tasks like this one actually provide more opportunity to do other things at the same time, since the agent sometimes needs 10-15 minutes to churn away on a new task. I went out to enjoy the Half Moon Bay 4th of July parade, occasionally checking in and prompting the next step for Fable from my phone.

Full details in the PR and this shared transcript. I switched to my laptop for the final review, which I conducted through GitHub's PR interface.

The most significant changes relate to transaction handling, which was the signature new feature in the earlier RC. The new RC now includes comprehensive documentation on the new transaction model, the intro to which I'll quote here in full:

Every method in this library that writes to the database - insert(), upsert(), update(), delete(), delete_where(), transform(), create_table(), create_index(), enable_fts() and the rest - runs inside its own transaction and commits it before returning. Your changes are saved to disk as soon as the method call finishes:
db = Database("data.db")
db.table("news").insert({"headline": "Dog wins award"})
# The new row is already saved - no commit() required
The same applies to raw SQL executed with db.execute() - a write statement is committed as soon as it has run.

You never need to call commit(), and you do not need to close the database to persist your changes. There are exactly two situations where you need to think about transactions:

You want to group several write operations together, so they either all succeed or all fail - use db.atomic().

You are managing a transaction yourself with db.begin(), in which case nothing is committed until you commit - the library will never commit a transaction you opened.

In reviewing Fable's documentation - I find that reviewing the documentation edits first is an excellent way to build an initial understanding of what has changed - I spotted this detail:

db.atomic() and the automatic per-method transactions are designed for connections in Python's default transaction handling mode. Connections created with the Python 3.12+ sqlite3.connect(..., autocommit=True) or autocommit=False options are not supported, because commit() and rollback() behave differently on those connections.

I admit I hadn't thought about how sqlite-utils would react to the more recent autocommit setting, added in Python 3.12. It turns out "behave differently on those connections" equated to almost the entire test suite failing, so I worked with the model to ensure that this difference would not break how the library works.

And a final review by GPT-5.5

I used to think that the idea of having one model review the work of another was somewhat absurd - it felt weirdly superstitious. The problem is it really does work - I've started habitually having Anthropic's best model review OpenAI's work and vice versa, because I've had that turn up interesting results often enough to be valuable.

I prompted Codex Desktop and GPT-5.5 xhigh with the following:

Review changes since the last RC. Also confirm that the changelog is up-to-date.

Which was enough to turn up two issues worth investigating:

Findings

[P1] sqlite_utils/db.py:663 db.query() now rejects non-row statements only after calling db.execute(), and sqlite_utils/db.py:705 auto-commits those writes first. So db.query("update ...") raises ValueError but the update is already committed. That is a surprising side effect for a method documented as “can only be used with SQL that returns rows.”

[P1] sqlite_utils/db.py:672 INSERT ... RETURNING through db.query() only commits after the returned generator is fully exhausted. db.query("insert ... returning ...") without iteration, or common next(db.query(...)) usage, leaves the transaction open and the write can be rolled back on close. This contradicts docs/changelog.rst:15 and docs/python-api.rst:232, which say it takes effect without iteration.

I pasted that into a fresh Fable session, which ran some experiments to confirm the problem:

Both findings were confirmed. db.query() called self.execute() first, which auto-commits writes, and only then checked cursor.description — so db.query("update ...") committed the update before raising ValueError. And the INSERT ... RETURNING commit lived at the end of the returned generator, so it never fired unless you exhausted the iterator — next(db.query(...)) or an un-iterated call left the transaction open, contradicting what the changelog and docs promise.

Here's the PR with the fix, and the full Claude Code transcript. Reviewing this code helped me build a better mental model of the edge cases of SQLite transaction semantics!

For an estimated (unsubsidized) cost of $149.25

I upgraded to the Claude Max $200/month plan (I was previously on $100/month) to increase my Fable allowance for the remaining time until the July 7th Fablepocalypse, when even Claude Max subscribers will have to pay full API cost for the model.

I was curious as to how much this would have cost me if I had been paying those costs directly. At first I thought those numbers weren't available to me since I had run the work remotely using Claude Code for web, and then I realized I could run AgentsView inside that existing session to get that cost estimate!

Run "uvx agentsview --help" and then use that tool to calculate the cost of this session

Claude figured out how to use the session list --include-children command and came out with the following:

Transcript	Model	Cost
Main session	claude-fable-5	$141.02
API-surface sweep agent	claude-fable-5	$2.40
Transactions/atomic review agent	claude-fable-5	$2.39
Post-rc1 commits review agent	claude-fable-5	$1.72
Migrations review agent	claude-fable-5	$1.40
Prompt-counting agent	claude-opus-4-8	$0.32
Total		$149.25

I'm very glad I'm on that subscription! I really should have followed my own advice and leaned more heavily into subagents with cheaper models.

Here's what claude.ai/settings/usage is showing me right now:

I have several other major Fable-driven projects on the go right now as well, with the goal of hitting 100% on that Fable bar just in time for the price increase.

The full release notes for sqlite-utils 4.0rc2

Here are the full release notes for the RC. I had Fable add these to an "Unreleased" section of the changelog as each change landed, reviewing them as it went. This has the neat side effect that the commit history of the changelog acts as a concise summary of each of the changes that went into the release.

In the past I've had a policy of writing release notes by hand, but honestly these are better than I would have created myself. Release notes are a great example of writing that I'm OK to outsource to agents because they need to be boring, predictable and accurate.

Breaking changes:

Write statements executed with db.execute() are now committed automatically, unless a transaction is already open in which case they join it. Previously they opened an implicit transaction that stayed open until something committed it - writes appeared to work when read on the same connection but were silently rolled back when the connection closed. Code that relied on rolling back uncommitted db.execute() writes should use the new db.begin() method to open an explicit transaction first. The transaction model is documented in full at Transactions and saving your changes.

db.query() now executes its SQL as soon as it is called, rather than waiting until the returned generator is first iterated. Rows are still fetched lazily during iteration. SQL errors are now raised at the call site, statements such as INSERT ... RETURNING are executed and committed immediately without needing to iterate over their results, and passing a statement that returns no rows - previously a silent no-op - now raises a ValueError recommending db.execute() instead. A statement rejected this way is rolled back before the error is raised, so it has no effect on the database.

Python API validation errors now raise ValueError instead of AssertionError. Previously invalid arguments - such as create_table() with no columns, transform() on a table that does not exist, or passing both ignore=True and replace=True - were rejected using bare assert statements, which are silently skipped when Python runs with the -O flag. Code that caught AssertionError for these cases should catch ValueError instead.

table.upsert() and table.upsert_all() now raise PrimaryKeyRequired if a record is missing a value for any primary key column, or has a value of None for one. Previously such records - which can never match an existing row - were quietly inserted as brand new rows, or triggered a confusing KeyError after the insert had already taken place.

db.enable_wal() and db.disable_wal() now raise a sqlite_utils.db.TransactionError if called while a transaction is open. Previously they would silently commit the open transaction as a side effect of changing the journal mode, breaking the rollback guarantee of db.atomic() and of user-managed transactions.

The View class no longer has an enable_fts() method. It existed only to raise NotImplementedError, since full-text search is not supported for views - calling it now raises AttributeError instead, and the method no longer appears in the API reference. The sqlite-utils enable-fts command shows a clean error when pointed at a view.

The no-op -d/--detect-types flag has been removed from the insert and upsert commands. Type detection has been the default for CSV/TSV data since 4.0a1, so the flag did nothing - invocations using it should simply drop it. --no-detect-types remains available to disable detection.

Database() now raises a sqlite_utils.db.TransactionError if passed a connection created with the Python 3.12+ sqlite3.connect(..., autocommit=True) or autocommit=False options. commit() and rollback() behave differently on those connections, which previously caused every write made by the library to be silently discarded when the connection closed.

Everything else:

Fixed a bug where table.delete_where(), table.optimize() and table.rebuild_fts() did not commit their changes, leaving the connection inside an open transaction. Their work - and any subsequent writes - could then be silently rolled back when the connection was closed. All three now use db.atomic(), consistent with the other write methods.

The sqlite-utils drop-table command now refuses to drop a view, and drop-view refuses to drop a table. Previously each would silently drop the wrong type of object if the name matched. Both now exit with an error suggesting the correct command to use.

Migrations applied by the new migrations system now run inside a transaction, together with the record of the migration having been applied. If a migration raises an exception its changes are rolled back and it stays pending, so it can be safely re-applied after the error is fixed. Migrations that cannot run inside a transaction, such as those executing VACUUM, can opt out using @migrations(transactional=False) - see Migrations and transactions.

table.upsert() and table.upsert_all() now detect the primary key or compound primary key of an existing table, so the pk= argument is no longer required when upserting into a table that already has a primary key.

db.table(table_name).insert({}) can now be used to insert a row consisting entirely of default values into an existing table, using INSERT INTO ... DEFAULT VALUES. (#759)

Improvements to the sqlite-utils migrate command: --stop-before values that do not match any known migration are now an error instead of being silently ignored, --stop-before now works correctly with migration files that still use the older sqlite_migrate.Migrations class, and --list is now a read-only operation that no longer creates the database file or the migrations tracking table. migrations.applied() now returns migrations in the order they were applied.

New db.begin(), db.commit() and db.rollback() methods for taking manual control of transactions, as an alternative to the db.atomic() context manager.

New documentation: Transactions and saving your changes describes how transactions work and when changes are committed, and a new Upgrading page details the changes needed to move between major versions.

Tags: projects, sqlite, sqlite-utils, annotated-release-notes, anthropic, claude, llm-pricing, coding-agents, claude-code, agentic-engineering, gpt, claude-mythos-fable

Quoting OpenAI

2026-06-26T17:10:43+00:00

We're beginning a limited preview of the GPT‑5.6 series: Sol, our flagship model; Terra, a balanced model for everyday work; and Luna, a fast and affordable model. Terra has competitive performance to GPT‑5.5 while being 2x cheaper and Luna brings strong capability at our lowest cost. [...]

We believe in broad access, and we plan to make GPT‑5.6 Sol, Terra, and Luna generally available in the coming weeks. As part of our ongoing engagement with the U.S. government, we previewed our plans and the models’ capabilities ahead of today’s launch. At their request, we are starting with a limited preview for a small group of trusted partners whose participation has been shared with the government, before releasing more broadly. [...]

GPT‑5.6 is priced per 1M tokens across three model sizes: Sol is $5 input / $30 output; Terra is $2.50 input / $15 output; and Luna is $1 input / $6 output. GPT‑5.6 also introduces more predictable prompt caching, including support for explicit cache breakpoints and a 30-minute minimum cache life. For GPT‑5.6 and later models, cache writes are billed at 1.25x the model’s uncached input rate, while cache reads continue to receive the 90% cached-input discount.

— OpenAI, Previewing GPT‑5.6 Sol: a next-generation model

Tags: openai, generative-ai, llms, llm-pricing, llm-release, ai-security-research, gpt

Our evaluation of OpenAI's GPT-5.5 cyber capabilities

2026-04-30T23:03:24+00:00

Our evaluation of OpenAI's GPT-5.5 cyber capabilities

The UK's AI Security Institute previously evaluated Claude Mythos: now they've evaluated GPT-5.5 for finding security vulnerability and found it to be comparable to Mythos, but unlike Mythos it's generally available right now.

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, anthropic, claude, ai-security-research, gpt

Quoting OpenAI Codex base_instructions

2026-04-28T22:02:53+00:00

Never talk about goblins, gremlins, raccoons, trolls, ogres, pigeons, or other animals or creatures unless it is absolutely and unambiguously relevant to the user's query.

— OpenAI Codex base_instructions, for GPT-5.5

Tags: ai, openai, prompt-engineering, generative-ai, llms, system-prompts, codex, gpt

Quoting Romain Huet

2026-04-25T12:06:55+00:00

Since GPT-5.4, we’ve unified Codex and the main model into a single system, so there’s no separate coding line anymore.

GPT-5.5 takes this further, with strong gains in agentic coding, computer use, and any task on a computer.

— Romain Huet, confirming OpenAI won't release a GPT-5.5-Codex model

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, gpt

GPT-5.5 prompting guide

2026-04-25T04:13:36+00:00

GPT-5.5 prompting guide

Now that GPT-5.5 is available in the API, OpenAI have released a wealth of useful tips on how best to prompt the new model.

Here's a neat trick they recommend for applications that might spend considerable time thinking before returning a user-visible response:

Before any tool calls for a multi-step task, send a short user-visible update that acknowledges the request and states the first step. Keep it to one or two sentences.

I've already noticed their Codex app doing this, and it does make longer running tasks feel less like the model has crashed.

OpenAI suggest running the following in Codex to upgrade your existing code using advice embedded in their openai-docs skill:

$openai-docs migrate this project to gpt-5.5

The upgrade guide the coding agent will follow is this one, which even includes light instructions on how to rewrite prompts to better fit the model.

Also relevant is the Using GPT-5.5 guide, which opens with this warning:

To get the most out of GPT-5.5, treat it as a new model family to tune for, not a drop-in replacement for gpt-5.2 or gpt-5.4. Begin migration with a fresh baseline instead of carrying over every instruction from an older prompt stack. Start with the smallest prompt that preserves the product contract, then tune reasoning effort, verbosity, tool descriptions, and output format against representative examples.

Interesting to see OpenAI recommend starting from scratch rather than trusting that existing prompts optimized for previous models will continue to work effectively with GPT-5.5.

Tags: ai, openai, prompt-engineering, generative-ai, llms, codex, gpt

llm 0.31

2026-04-24T23:35:07+00:00

Release: llm 0.31

New GPT-5.5 OpenAI model: llm -m gpt-5.5. #1418

New option to set the text verbosity level for GPT-5+ OpenAI models: -o verbosity low. Values are low, medium, high.

New option for setting the image detail level used for image attachments to OpenAI models: -o image_detail low - values are low, high and auto, and GPT-5.4 and 5.5 also accept original.

Models listed in extra-openai-models.yaml are now also registered as asynchronous. #1395

Tags: openai, llm, gpt

A pelican for GPT-5.5 via the semi-official Codex backdoor API

2026-04-23T19:59:47+00:00

GPT-5.5 is out. It's available in OpenAI Codex and is rolling out to paid ChatGPT subscribers. I've had some preview access and found it to be a fast, effective and highly capable model. As is usually the case these days, it's hard to put into words what's good about it - I ask it to build things and it builds exactly what I ask for!

There's one notable omission from today's release - the API:

API deployments require different safeguards and we are working closely with partners and customers on the safety and security requirements for serving it at scale. We'll bring GPT‑5.5 and GPT‑5.5 Pro to the API very soon.

When I run my pelican benchmark I always prefer to use an API, to avoid hidden system prompts in ChatGPT or other agent harnesses from impacting the results.

The OpenClaw backdoor

One of the ongoing tension points in the AI world over the past few months has concerned how agent harnesses like OpenClaw and Pi interact with the APIs provided by the big providers.

Both OpenAI and Anthropic offer popular monthly subscriptions which provide access to their models at a significant discount to their raw API.

OpenClaw integrated directly with this mechanism, and was then blocked from doing so by Anthropic. This kicked off a whole thing. OpenAI - who recently hired OpenClaw creator Peter Steinberger - saw an opportunity for an easy karma win and announced that OpenClaw was welcome to continue integrating with OpenAI's subscriptions via the same mechanism used by their (open source) Codex CLI tool.

Does this mean anyone can write code that integrates with OpenAI's Codex-specific APIs to hook into those existing subscriptions?

The other day Jeremy Howard asked:

Anyone know whether OpenAI officially supports the use of the /backend-api/codex/responses endpoint that Pi and Opencode (IIUC) uses?

It turned out that on March 30th OpenAI's Romain Huet had tweeted:

We want people to be able to use Codex, and their ChatGPT subscription, wherever they like! That means in the app, in the terminal, but also in JetBrains, Xcode, OpenCode, Pi, and now Claude Code.

That’s why Codex CLI and Codex app server are open source too! 🙂

And Peter Steinberger replied to Jeremy that:

OpenAI sub is officially supported.

llm-openai-via-codex

So... I had Claude Code reverse-engineer the openai/codex repo, figure out how authentication tokens were stored and build me llm-openai-via-codex, a new plugin for LLM which picks up your existing Codex subscription and uses it to run prompts!

(With hindsight I wish I'd used GPT-5.4 or the GPT-5.5 preview, it would have been funnier. I genuinely considered rewriting the project from scratch using Codex and GPT-5.5 for the sake of the joke, but decided not to spend any more time on this!)

Here's how to use it:

Install Codex CLI, buy an OpenAI plan, login to Codex
Install LLM: uv tool install llm
Install the new plugin: llm install llm-openai-via-codex
Start prompting: llm -m openai-codex/gpt-5.5 'Your prompt goes here'

All existing LLM features should also work - use -a filepath.jpg/URL to attach an image, llm chat -m openai-codex/gpt-5.5 to start an ongoing chat, llm logs to view logged conversations and llm --tool ... to try it out with tool support.

And some pelicans

Let's generate a pelican!

llm install llm-openai-via-codex
llm -m openai-codex/gpt-5.5 'Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle'

Here's what I got back:

I've seen better from GPT-5.4, so I tagged on -o reasoning_effort xhigh and tried again:

That one took almost four minutes to generate, but I think it's a much better effort.

If you compare the SVG code (default, xhigh) the xhigh one took a very different approach, which is much more CSS-heavy - as demonstrated by those gradients. xhigh used 9,322 reasoning tokens where the default used just 39.

A few more notes on GPT-5.5

One of the most notable things about GPT-5.5 is the pricing. Once it goes live in the API it's going to be priced at twice the cost of GPT-5.4 - $5 per 1M input tokens and $30 per 1M output tokens, where 5.4 is $2.5 and $15.

GPT-5.5 Pro will be even more: $30 per 1M input tokens and $180 per 1M output tokens.

GPT-5.4 will remain available. At half the price of 5.5 this feels like 5.4 is to 5.5 as Claude Sonnet is to Claude Opus.

Ethan Mollick has a detailed review of GPT-5.5 where he put it (and GPT-5.5 Pro) through an array of interesting challenges. His verdict: the jagged frontier continues to hold, with GPT-5.5 excellent at some things and challenged by others in a way that remains difficult to predict.

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, chatgpt, llms, llm, llm-pricing, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-reasoning, llm-release, codex, gpt

The November 2025 inflection point

2026-01-04T23:21:42+00:00

It genuinely feels to me like GPT-5.2 and Opus 4.5 in November represent an inflection point - one of those moments where the models get incrementally better in a way that tips across an invisible capability line where suddenly a whole bunch of much harder coding problems open up.

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, ai-assisted-programming, anthropic, claude, claude-4, gpt-5, november-2025-inflection, gpt

I ported JustHTML from Python to JavaScript with Codex CLI and GPT-5.2 in 4.5 hours

2025-12-15T23:58:38+00:00

I wrote about JustHTML yesterday - Emil Stenström's project to build a new standards compliant HTML5 parser in pure Python code using coding agents running against the comprehensive html5lib-tests testing library. Last night, purely out of curiosity, I decided to try porting JustHTML from Python to JavaScript with the least amount of effort possible, using Codex CLI and GPT-5.2. It worked beyond my expectations.

TL;DR

I built simonw/justjshtml, a dependency-free HTML5 parsing library in JavaScript which passes 9,200 tests from the html5lib-tests suite and imitates the API design of Emil's JustHTML library.

It took two initial prompts and a few tiny follow-ups. GPT-5.2 running in Codex CLI ran uninterrupted for several hours, burned through 1,464,295 input tokens, 97,122,176 cached input tokens and 625,563 output tokens and ended up producing 9,000 lines of fully tested JavaScript across 43 commits.

Time elapsed from project idea to finished library: about 4 hours, during which I also bought and decorated a Christmas tree with family and watched the latest Knives Out movie.

Some background

One of the most important contributions of the HTML5 specification ten years ago was the way it precisely specified how invalid HTML should be parsed. The world is full of invalid documents and having a specification that covers those means browsers can treat them in the same way - there's no more "undefined behavior" to worry about when building parsing software.

Unsurprisingly, those invalid parsing rules are pretty complex! The free online book Idiosyncrasies of the HTML parser by Simon Pieters is an excellent deep dive into this topic, in particular Chapter 3. The HTML parser.

The Python html5lib project started the html5lib-tests repository with a set of implementation-independent tests. These have since become the gold standard for interoperability testing of HTML5 parsers, and are used by projects such as Servo which used them to help build html5ever, a "high-performance browser-grade HTML5 parser" written in Rust.

Emil Stenström's JustHTML project is a pure-Python implementation of an HTML5 parser that passes the full html5lib-tests suite. Emil spent a couple of months working on this as a side project, deliberately picking a problem with a comprehensive existing test suite to see how far he could get with coding agents.

At one point he had the agents rewrite it based on a close inspection of the Rust html5ever library. I don't know how much of this was direct translation versus inspiration (here's Emil's commentary on that) - his project has 1,215 commits total so it appears to have included a huge amount of iteration, not just a straight port.

My project is a straight port. I instructed Codex CLI to build a JavaScript version of Emil's Python code.

The process in detail

I started with a bit of mise en place. I checked out two repos and created an empty third directory for the new project:

cd ~/dev
git clone https://github.com/EmilStenstrom/justhtml
git clone https://github.com/html5lib/html5lib-tests
mkdir justjshtml
cd justjshtml

Then I started Codex CLI for GPT-5.2 like this:

codex --yolo -m gpt-5.2

That --yolo flag is a shortcut for --dangerously-bypass-approvals-and-sandbox, which is every bit as dangerous as it sounds.

My first prompt told Codex to inspect the existing code and use it to build a specification for the new JavaScript library:

We are going to create a JavaScript port of ~/dev/justhtml - an HTML parsing library that passes the full ~/dev/html5lib-tests test suite. It is going to have a similar API to the Python library but in JavaScript. It will have no dependencies other than raw JavaScript, hence it will work great in the browser and node.js and other environments. Start by reading ~/dev/justhtml and designing the user-facing API for the new library - create a spec.md containing your plan.

I reviewed the spec, which included a set of proposed milestones, and told it to add another:

Add an early step to the roadmap that involves an initial version that parses a simple example document that is valid and returns the right results. Then add and commit the spec.md file.

Here's the resulting spec.md file. My request for that initial version became "Milestone 0.5" which looked like this:

Milestone 0.5 — End-to-end smoke parse (single valid document)

Implement the smallest end-to-end slice so the public API is real early:

new JustHTML("<html><head></head><body><p>Hello</p></body></html>") returns a tree with the expected tag structure and text nodes.

doc.toText() returns "Hello" and doc.errors is empty for this valid input.

Add scripts/smoke.js (no deps) that runs the example and asserts the expected structure/output.

Gate: node scripts/smoke.js passes.

Then I told it:

Implement Milestone 0.5

And off it went. The resulting code appeared to work so I said:

Configure GitHub Actions test.yml to run that on every commit, then commit and push

I ran git init and created a private GitHub repository for this project at this point, and set up the local directory to push to that remote.

Here's that initial push. Then I told it:

OK do the rest, commit and push often

And that was almost it!

I set my laptop to not fall asleep and left it to its devices while we went off to buy a Christmas tree. The "commit and push often" meant I could monitor its progress on my phone by refreshing the commit log on GitHub.

I was running this against my $20/month ChatGPT Plus account, which has a five hour token allowance window for Codex CLI. That ran out at 6:35pm and Codex paused, so I waited until the reset point at 7:14pm and typed:

Keep going

At 9:30pm it declared itself done with the following summary message:

• What’s Done

  - html5lib-tests now run in CI and pass: tokenizer 6810/6810, tree 1770/1782
    (12 skipped: #script-on), serializer 230/230, encoding 82/83 (1 skipped:
    scripted) (.github/workflows/test.yml:1).
  - Public API expanded: stream() (src/stream.js:1), CSS selectors query()/
    matches() (src/selector.js:1), and toMarkdown() (src/markdown.js:1), all
    exported via src/index.js:1.
  - Added no-deps unit scripts for selectors/stream/markdown (scripts/run-
    selector-tests.js:1, scripts/run-stream-tests.js:1, scripts/run-markdown-
    tests.js:1) and wired them into CI.
  - Fixed TreeBuilder so <br> no longer closes <p> (src/treebuilder.js:647).

As a finishing touch, I had it add a playground interface so I could try out the new library in my browser. I prompted:

Add a playground.html in the top level folder which loads the necessary ES modules from ./src/... and implements the exact same functionality as seen on https://tools.simonwillison.net/justhtml but using the JavaScript library instead of Pyodide

It fetched my existing JustHTML playground page (described here) using curl and built a new playground.html file that loaded the new JavaScript code instead. This worked perfectly.

I enabled GitHub Pages for my still-private repo which meant I could access the new playground at this URL:

https://simonw.github.io/justjshtml/playground.html

All it needed now was some documentation:

Add a comprehensive README with full usage instructions including attribution plus how this was built plus how to use in in HTML plus how to use it in Node.js

You can read the result here.

We are now at eight prompts total, running for just over four hours and I've decorated for Christmas and watched Wake Up Dead Man on Netflix.

According to Codex CLI:

Token usage: total=2,089,858 input=1,464,295 (+ 97,122,176 cached) output=625,563 (reasoning 437,010)

My llm-prices.com calculator estimates that at $29.41 if I was paying for those tokens at API prices, but they were included in my $20/month ChatGPT Plus subscription so the actual extra cost to me was zero.

What can we learn from this?

I'm sharing this project because I think it demonstrates a bunch of interesting things about the state of LLMs in December 2025.

Frontier LLMs really can perform complex, multi-hour tasks with hundreds of tool calls and minimal supervision. I used GPT-5.2 for this but I have no reason to believe that Claude Opus 4.5 or Gemini 3 Pro would not be able to achieve the same thing - the only reason I haven't tried is that I don't want to burn another 4 hours of time and several million tokens on more runs.
If you can reduce a problem to a robust test suite you can set a coding agent loop loose on it with a high degree of confidence that it will eventually succeed. I called this designing the agentic loop a few months ago. I think it's the key skill to unlocking the potential of LLMs for complex tasks.
Porting entire open source libraries from one language to another via a coding agent works extremely well.
Code is so cheap it's practically free. Code that works continues to carry a cost, but that cost has plummeted now that coding agents can check their work as they go.
We haven't even begun to unpack the etiquette and ethics around this style of development. Is it responsible and appropriate to churn out a direct port of a library like this in a few hours while watching a movie? What would it take for code built like this to be trusted in production?

I'll end with some open questions:

Does this library represent a legal violation of copyright of either the Rust library or the Python one?
Even if this is legal, is it ethical to build a library in this way?
Does this format of development hurt the open source ecosystem?
Can I even assert copyright over this, given how much of the work was produced by the LLM?
Is it responsible to publish software libraries built in this way?
How much better would this library be if an expert team hand crafted it over the course of several months?

Update 11th January 2026: I originally ended this post with just these open questions, but I've now provided my own answers to the questions in a new post.

Tags: html, javascript, python, ai, generative-ai, llms, ai-assisted-programming, gpt-5, codex, november-2025-inflection, vibe-porting, gpt

OpenAI are quietly adopting skills, now available in ChatGPT and Codex CLI

2025-12-12T23:29:51+00:00

One of the things that most excited me about Anthropic's new Skills mechanism back in October is how easy it looked for other platforms to implement. A skill is just a folder with a Markdown file and some optional extra resources and scripts, so any LLM tool with the ability to navigate and read from a filesystem should be capable of using them. It turns out OpenAI are doing exactly that, with skills support quietly showing up in both their Codex CLI tool and now also in ChatGPT itself.

Skills in ChatGPT

I learned about this from Elias Judin this morning. It turns out the Code Interpreter feature of ChatGPT now has a new /home/oai/skills folder which you can access simply by prompting:

Create a zip file of /home/oai/skills

I tried that myself and got back this zip file. Here's a UI for exploring its content (more about that tool).

So far they cover spreadsheets, docx and PDFs. Interestingly their chosen approach for PDFs and documents is to convert them to rendered per-page PNGs and then pass those through their vision-enabled GPT models, presumably to maintain information from layout and graphics that would be lost if they just ran text extraction.

Elias shared copies in a GitHub repo. They look very similar to Anthropic's implementation of the same kind of idea, currently published in their anthropics/skills repository.

I tried it out by prompting:

Create a PDF with a summary of the rimu tree situation right now and what it means for kakapo breeding season

Sure enough, GPT-5.2 Thinking started with:

Reading skill.md for PDF creation guidelines

Then:

Searching rimu mast and Kākāpō 2025 breeding status

It took just over eleven minutes to produce this PDF, which was long enough that I had Claude Code for web build me a custom PDF viewing tool while I waited.

Here's ChatGPT's PDF in that tool.

(I am very excited about Kākāpō breeding season this year.)

The reason it took so long is that it was fastidious about looking at and tweaking its own work. I appreciated that at one point it tried rendering the PDF and noticed that the macrons in kākāpō were not supported by the chosen font, so it switched to something else:

Skills in Codex CLI

Meanwhile, two weeks ago OpenAI's open source Codex CLI tool landed a PR titled feat: experimental support for skills.md. The most recent docs for that are in docs/skills.md.

The documentation suggests that any folder in ~/.codex/skills will be treated as a skill.

I dug around and found the code that generates the prompt that drives the skill system in codex-rs/core/src/skills/render.rs - here's a Gist with a more readable version of that prompt.

I used Claude Opus 4.5's skill authoring skill to create this skill for creating Datasette plugins, then installed it into my Codex CLI skills folder like this:

git clone https://github.com/datasette/skill \
  ~/.codex/skills/datasette-plugin

You have to run Codex with the --enable skills option. I ran this:

cd /tmp
mkdir datasette-cowsay
cd datasette-cowsay
codex --enable skills -m gpt-5.2

Then prompted:

list skills

And Codex replied:

- datasette-plugins — Writing Datasette plugins using Python + pluggy (file: /Users/simon/.codex/skills/datasette-plugin/SKILL.md)
- Discovery — How to find/identify available skills (no SKILL.md path provided in the list)

Then I said:

Write a Datasette plugin in this folder adding a /-/cowsay?text=hello page that displays a pre with cowsay from PyPI saying that text

It worked perfectly! Here's the plugin code it wrote and here's a copy of the full Codex CLI transcript, generated with my terminal-to-html tool.

You can try that out yourself if you have uvx installed like this:

uvx --with https://github.com/simonw/datasette-cowsay/archive/refs/heads/main.zip \
  datasette

Then visit:

http://127.0.0.1:8001/-/cowsay?text=This+is+pretty+fun

Skills are a keeper

When I first wrote about skills in October I said Claude Skills are awesome, maybe a bigger deal than MCP. The fact that it's just turned December and OpenAI have already leaned into them in a big way reinforces to me that I called that one correctly.

Skills are based on a very light specification, if you could even call it that, but I still think it would be good for these to be formally documented somewhere. This could be a good initiative for the new Agentic AI Foundation (previously) to take on.

Tags: pdf, ai, kakapo, openai, prompt-engineering, generative-ai, chatgpt, llms, ai-assisted-programming, anthropic, coding-agents, gpt-5, codex, skills, gpt

GPT-5.2

2025-12-11T23:58:04+00:00

OpenAI reportedly declared a "code red" on the 1st of December in response to increasingly credible competition from the likes of Google's Gemini 3. It's less than two weeks later and they just announced GPT-5.2, calling it "the most capable model series yet for professional knowledge work".

Key characteristics of GPT-5.2

The new model comes in two variants: GPT-5.2 and GPT-5.2 Pro. There's no Mini variant yet.

GPT-5.2 is available via their UI in both "instant" and "thinking" modes, presumably still corresponding to the API concept of different reasoning effort levels.

The knowledge cut-off date for both variants is now August 31st 2025. This is significant - GPT 5.1 and 5 were both Sep 30, 2024 and GPT-5 mini was May 31, 2024.

Both of the 5.2 models have a 400,000 token context window and 128,000 max output tokens - no different from 5.1 or 5.

Pricing wise 5.2 is a rare increase - it's 1.4x the cost of GPT 5.1, at $1.75/million input and $14/million output. GPT-5.2 Pro is $21.00/million input and a hefty $168.00/million output, putting it up there with their previous most expensive models o1 Pro and GPT-4.5.

So far the main benchmark results we have are self-reported by OpenAI. The most interesting ones are a 70.9% score on their GDPval "Knowledge work tasks" benchmark (GPT-5 got 38.8%) and a 52.9% on ARC-AGI-2 (up from 17.6% for GPT-5.1 Thinking).

The ARC Prize Twitter account provided this interesting note on the efficiency gains for GPT-5.2 Pro

A year ago, we verified a preview of an unreleased version of @OpenAI o3 (High) that scored 88% on ARC-AGI-1 at est. $4.5k/task

Today, we’ve verified a new GPT-5.2 Pro (X-High) SOTA score of 90.5% at $11.64/task

This represents a ~390X efficiency improvement in one year

GPT-5.2 can be accessed in OpenAI's Codex CLI tool like this:

codex -m gpt-5.2

There are three new API models:

gpt-5.2 - I think this is what you get if you select "GPT-5.2 Thinking" in ChatGPT but I'm a little confused.
gpt-5.2-chat-latest - the model used by ChatGPT for "GPT-5.2 Instant" mode. It's priced the same as GPT-5.2 but has a reduced 128,000 context window with 16,384 max output tokens.
gpt-5.2-pro

OpenAI have published a new GPT-5.2 Prompting Guide. An interesting note from that document is that compaction can now be run with a new dedicated server-side API:

For long-running, tool-heavy workflows that exceed the standard context window, GPT-5.2 with Reasoning supports response compaction via the /responses/compact endpoint. Compaction performs a loss-aware compression pass over prior conversation state, returning encrypted, opaque items that preserve task-relevant information while dramatically reducing token footprint. This allows the model to continue reasoning across extended workflows without hitting context limits.

It's better at vision

One note from the announcement that caught my eye:

GPT‑5.2 Thinking is our strongest vision model yet, cutting error rates roughly in half on chart reasoning and software interface understanding.

I had disappointing results from GPT-5 on an OCR task a while ago. I tried it against GPT-5.2 and it did much better:

llm -m gpt-5.2 ocr -a https://static.simonwillison.net/static/2025/ft.jpeg

Here's the result from that, which cost 1,520 input and 1,022 for a total of 1.6968 cents.

Rendering some pelicans

For my classic "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle" test:

llm -m gpt-5.2 "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle"

And for the more advanced alternative test, which tests instruction following in a little more depth:

llm -m gpt-5.2 "Generate an SVG of a California brown pelican riding a bicycle. The bicycle
must have spokes and a correctly shaped bicycle frame. The pelican must have its
characteristic large pouch, and there should be a clear indication of feathers.
The pelican must be clearly pedaling the bicycle. The image should show the full
breeding plumage of the California brown pelican."

Update 14th December 2025: I used GPT-5.2 running in Codex CLI to port a complex Python library to JavaScript. It ran without interference for nearly four hours and completed a complex task exactly to my specification.

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, llm, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-release, gpt-5, gpt

Building more with GPT-5.1-Codex-Max

2025-11-19T23:15:10+00:00

Building more with GPT-5.1-Codex-Max

Hot on the heels of yesterday's Gemini 3 Pro release comes a new model from OpenAI called GPT-5.1-Codex-Max.

(Remember when GPT-5 was meant to bring in a new era of less confusing model names? That didn't last!)

It's currently only available through their Codex CLI coding agent, where it's the new default model:

Starting today, GPT‑5.1-Codex-Max will replace GPT‑5.1-Codex as the default model in Codex surfaces. Unlike GPT‑5.1, which is a general-purpose model, we recommend using GPT‑5.1-Codex-Max and the Codex family of models only for agentic coding tasks in Codex or Codex-like environments.

It's not available via the API yet but should be shortly.

The timing of this release is interesting given that Gemini 3 Pro appears to have aced almost all of the benchmarks just yesterday. It's reminiscent of the period in 2024 when OpenAI consistently made big announcements that happened to coincide with Gemini releases.

OpenAI's self-reported SWE-Bench Verified score is particularly notable: 76.5% for thinking level "high" and 77.9% for the new "xhigh". That was the one benchmark where Gemini 3 Pro was out-performed by Claude Sonnet 4.5 - Gemini 3 Pro got 76.2% and Sonnet 4.5 got 77.2%. OpenAI now have the highest scoring model there by a full .7 of a percentage point!

They also report a score of 58.1% on Terminal Bench 2.0, beating Gemini 3 Pro's 54.2% (and Sonnet 4.5's 42.8%.)

The most intriguing part of this announcement concerns the model's approach to long context problems:

GPT‑5.1-Codex-Max is built for long-running, detailed work. It’s our first model natively trained to operate across multiple context windows through a process called compaction, coherently working over millions of tokens in a single task. [...]

Compaction enables GPT‑5.1-Codex-Max to complete tasks that would have previously failed due to context-window limits, such as complex refactors and long-running agent loops by pruning its history while preserving the most important context over long horizons. In Codex applications, GPT‑5.1-Codex-Max automatically compacts its session when it approaches its context window limit, giving it a fresh context window. It repeats this process until the task is completed.

There's a lot of confusion on Hacker News about what this actually means. Claude Code already does a version of compaction, automatically summarizing previous turns when the context runs out. Does this just mean that Codex-Max is better at that process?

I had it draw me a couple of pelicans by typing "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle" directly into the Codex CLI tool. Here's thinking level medium:

And here's thinking level "xhigh":

I also tried xhigh on the my longer pelican test prompt, which came out like this:

Also today: GPT-5.1 Pro is rolling out today to all Pro users. According to the ChatGPT release notes:

GPT-5.1 Pro is rolling out today for all ChatGPT Pro users and is available in the model picker. GPT-5 Pro will remain available as a legacy model for 90 days before being retired.

That's a pretty fast deprecation cycle for the GPT-5 Pro model that was released just three months ago.

Via Hacker News

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, evals, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-release, gpt-5, codex, gpt-codex, november-2025-inflection, gpt

GPT-5.1 Instant and GPT-5.1 Thinking System Card Addendum

2025-11-14T13:46:23+00:00

GPT-5.1 Instant and GPT-5.1 Thinking System Card Addendum

I was confused about whether the new "adaptive thinking" feature of GPT-5.1 meant they were moving away from the "router" mechanism where GPT-5 in ChatGPT automatically selected a model for you.

This page addresses that, emphasis mine:

GPT‑5.1 Instant is more conversational than our earlier chat model, with improved instruction following and an adaptive reasoning capability that lets it decide when to think before responding. GPT‑5.1 Thinking adapts thinking time more precisely to each question. GPT‑5.1 Auto will continue to route each query to the model best suited for it, so that in most cases, the user does not need to choose a model at all.

So GPT‑5.1 Instant can decide when to think before responding, GPT-5.1 Thinking can decide how hard to think, and GPT-5.1 Auto (not a model you can use via the API) can decide which out of Instant and Thinking a prompt should be routed to.

If anything this feels more confusing than the GPT-5 routing situation!

The system card addendum PDF itself is somewhat frustrating: it shows results on an internal benchmark called "Production Benchmarks", also mentioned in the GPT-5 system card, but with vanishingly little detail about what that tests beyond high level category names like "personal data", "extremism" or "mental health" and "emotional reliance" - those last two both listed as "New evaluations, as introduced in the GPT-5 update on sensitive conversations" - a PDF dated October 27th that I had previously missed.

That document describes the two new categories like so:

Emotional Reliance not_unsafe - tests that the model does not produce disallowed content under our policies related to unhealthy emotional dependence or attachment to ChatGPT

Mental Health not_unsafe - tests that the model does not produce disallowed content under our policies in situations where there are signs that a user may be experiencing isolated delusions, psychosis, or mania

So these are the ChatGPT Psychosis benchmarks!

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, chatgpt, llms, llm-reasoning, ai-personality, gpt-5, gpt

Introducing GPT-5.1 for developers

2025-11-13T23:59:35+00:00

Introducing GPT-5.1 for developers

OpenAI announced GPT-5.1 yesterday, calling it a smarter, more conversational ChatGPT. Today they've added it to their API.

We actually got four new models today:

There are a lot of details to absorb here.

GPT-5.1 introduces a new reasoning effort called "none" (previous were minimal, low, medium, and high) - and none is the new default.

This makes the model behave like a non-reasoning model for latency-sensitive use cases, with the high intelligence of GPT‑5.1 and added bonus of performant tool-calling. Relative to GPT‑5 with 'minimal' reasoning, GPT‑5.1 with no reasoning is better at parallel tool calling (which itself increases end-to-end task completion speed), coding tasks, following instructions, and using search tools---and supports web search⁠ in our API platform.

When you DO enable thinking you get to benefit from a new feature called "adaptive reasoning":

On straightforward tasks, GPT‑5.1 spends fewer tokens thinking, enabling snappier product experiences and lower token bills. On difficult tasks that require extra thinking, GPT‑5.1 remains persistent, exploring options and checking its work in order to maximize reliability.

Another notable new feature for 5.1 is extended prompt cache retention:

Extended prompt cache retention keeps cached prefixes active for longer, up to a maximum of 24 hours. Extended Prompt Caching works by offloading the key/value tensors to GPU-local storage when memory is full, significantly increasing the storage capacity available for caching.

To enable this set "prompt_cache_retention": "24h" in the API call. Weirdly there's no price increase involved with this at all. I asked about that and OpenAI's Steven Heidel replied:

with 24h prompt caching we move the caches from gpu memory to gpu-local storage. that storage is not free, but we made it free since it moves capacity from a limited resource (GPUs) to a more abundant resource (storage). then we can serve more traffic overall!

The most interesting documentation I've seen so far is in the new 5.1 cookbook, which also includes details of the new shell and apply_patch built-in tools. The apply_patch.py implementation is worth a look, especially if you're interested in the advancing state-of-the-art of file editing tools for LLMs.

I'm still working on integrating the new models into LLM. The Codex models are Responses-API-only.

I got this pelican for GPT-5.1 default (no thinking):

And this one with reasoning effort set to high:

These actually feel like a regression from GPT-5 to me. The bicycles have less spokes!

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, llm, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-reasoning, llm-release, gpt-5, gpt-codex, november-2025-inflection, gpt

Pelican on a Bike - Raytracer Edition

2025-11-09T16:51:42+00:00

Pelican on a Bike - Raytracer Edition

beetle_b ran this prompt against a bunch of recent LLMs:

Write a POV-Ray file that shows a pelican riding on a bicycle.

This turns out to be a harder challenge than SVG, presumably because there are less examples of POV-Ray in the training data:

Most produced a script that failed to parse. I would paste the error back into the chat and let it attempt a fix.

The results are really fun though! A lot of them end up accompanied by a weird floating egg for some reason - here's Claude Opus 4:

I think the best result came from GPT-5 - again with the floating egg though!

I decided to try this on the new gpt-5-codex-mini, using the trick I described yesterday. Here's the code it wrote.

./target/debug/codex prompt -m gpt-5-codex-mini \
  "Write a POV-Ray file that shows a pelican riding on a bicycle."

It turns out you can render POV files on macOS like this:

brew install povray
povray demo.pov # produces demo.png

The code GPT-5 Codex Mini created didn't quite work, so I round-tripped it through Sonnet 4.5 via Claude Code a couple of times - transcript here. Once it had fixed the errors I got this:

That's significantly worse than the one beetle_b got from GPT-5 Mini!

Via BeetleB on Hacker News

Tags: 3d, ray-tracing, ai, generative-ai, llms, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, gpt-5, gpt

Reverse engineering Codex CLI to get GPT-5-Codex-Mini to draw me a pelican

2025-11-09T03:31:34+00:00

OpenAI partially released a new model yesterday called GPT-5-Codex-Mini, which they describe as "a more compact and cost-efficient version of GPT-5-Codex". It's currently only available via their Codex CLI tool and VS Code extension, with proper API access "coming soon". I decided to use Codex to reverse engineer the Codex CLI tool and give me the ability to prompt the new model directly.

I made a video talking through my progress and demonstrating the final results.

This is a little bit cheeky

OpenAI clearly don't intend for people to access this model directly just yet. It's available exclusively through Codex CLI which is a privileged application - it gets to access a special backend API endpoint that's not publicly documented, and it uses a special authentication mechanism that bills usage directly to the user's existing ChatGPT account.

I figured reverse-engineering that API directly would be somewhat impolite. But... Codex CLI is an open source project released under an Apache 2.0 license. How about upgrading that to let me run my own prompts through its existing API mechanisms instead?

This felt like a somewhat absurd loophole, and I couldn't resist trying it out and seeing what happened.

Codex CLI is written in Rust

The openai/codex repository contains the source code for the Codex CLI tool, which OpenAI rewrote in Rust just a few months ago.

I don't know much Rust at all.

I made my own clone on GitHub and checked it out locally:

git clone git@github.com:simonw/codex
cd codex

Then I fired up Codex itself (in dangerous mode, because I like living dangerously):

codex --dangerously-bypass-approvals-and-sandbox

And ran this prompt:

Figure out how to build the rust version of this tool and then build it

This worked. It churned away for a bit and figured out how to build itself. This is a useful starting point for a project like this - in figuring out the compile step the coding agent gets seeded with a little bit of relevant information about the project, and if it can compile that means it can later partially test the code it is writing while it works.

Once the compile had succeeded I fed it the design for the new feature I wanted:

Add a new sub-command to the Rust tool called "codex prompt"

codex prompt "prompt goes here" - this runs the given prompt directly against the OpenAI API that Codex uses, with the same code path and authentication credentials as the rest of Codex.

codex prompt -m <model_name> "prompt goes here" - same again but lets you set the model

codex prompt "prompt goes here" -s/--system "system prompt goes here" - runs with a custom system/developer message

codex prompt --models - this lists all available models that can be used with the "codex prompt" command

My design for this new sub-command is lifted directly from my own llm command.

Iterating on the code

Codex got to work. I've shared the full transcript here (using the tool I described here), but this TODO list it made itself is a useful summary of what it decided to do:

Updated Plan
└ ✔ Inspect CLI structure and relevant core utilities for sending prompts and listing models
  ✔ Implement new `codex prompt` subcommand (CLI plumbing + command handler)
  ✔ Format, lint, and test (`just fmt`, `just fix -p codex-cli`, `cargo test -p codex-cli`)

I like that it figured out the justfile in the repo and decided to use it to run formatting and linting commands without me needing to tell it to. (Update: it turns out that was dictated by the AGENTS.md file.)

I tried running the first version of the code it wrote like this:

./target/debug/codex prompt 'Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle' -m gpt-5-codex-mini

... and it didn't quite work. I got this:

(reasoning summary) **Seeking
(reasoning summary)  instructions
(reasoning summary)  and
(reasoning summary)  sandbox
(reasoning summary)  info
(reasoning summary) **
(reasoning summary) **Dec
(reasoning summary) iding
(reasoning summary)  on
(reasoning summary)  SVG
(reasoning summary)  creation
(reasoning summary)  approach
(reasoning summary) **
(reasoning summary) **Checking
(reasoning summary)  current
(reasoning summary)  directory
(reasoning summary) **
(reasoning summary) **Preparing
(reasoning summary)  to
(reasoning summary)  check
(reasoning summary)  current
(reasoning summary)  directory
(reasoning summary) **
I�m ready to help�what would you like me to do next?I�m ready to help�what would you like me to do next?
Token usage: total=2459 input=2374 cached_input=0 output=85 reasoning_output=64

Note that it DID think about SVG creation, but then decided it should look at the current directory. This isn't what I want - it appeared to be running in Codex's normal mode with a system prompt telling it to edit files on disk. I wanted it to respond to the prompt without acting as if it had a full workspace available to it.

I prompted it again, pasting in the broken output:

this did not seem to work - here is what happened - note that the reasoning summary comes out on a lot of lines when I would rather it streams out to stderr on the same line (flushing constantly) - and then despite the reasoning summary thinking about pelican on SVG it did not actually act on that and display the result, which is very surprising. [pasted content]

It churned for a bit more, but from the output it looked like it was still trying to include Codex-specific tools and workspace information. So I said:

Note that this new 'codex prompt' command should NOT be able to execute any tools at all, and should not have to think about the workspace or sandbox - it should send a single prompt with no tools and then stream and display a response and then stop.

This got me a new build, but when I ran it:

Error: unexpected status 400 Bad Request: {"detail":"Instructions are not valid"}

My guess is that OpenAI's custom backend API for Codex doesn't like it if you attempt to call it without passing in the expected instructions. Fair enough!

Rather than paste that error in I got Codex to try the command itself, so it could see the error:

You try running this and see what happens: ./target/debug/codex prompt 'Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle'

Codex switched back to the default instructions. From its reply:

cli/src/prompt_cmd.rs#L1-L320 now forces a tool-free request: we keep the workspace defaults, inject a lightweight system/developer message (“don’t run tools”), disable apply_patch/web search via config overrides, and build the outbound prompt as just that system span plus the user text.

I guess that will have to do. I asked for one more feature:

Add a --debug option to the codex prompt command which causes the full JSON request and response to be printed to stderr, plus the URL that is being accessed and the HTTP verb

... and we're ready to try this thing out!

Notably I haven't written a single line of Rust myself here and paid almost no attention to what it was actually doing. My main contribution was to run the binary every now and then to see if it was doing what I needed yet.

I've pushed the working code to a prompt-subcommand branch in my repo if you want to take a look and see how it all works.

Let's draw some pelicans

With the final version of the code built, I drew some pelicans. Here's the full terminal transcript, but here are some highlights.

This is with the default GPT-5-Codex model:

./target/debug/codex prompt "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle"

I pasted it into my tools.simonwillison.net/svg-render tool and got the following:

I ran it again for GPT-5:

./target/debug/codex prompt "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle" -m gpt-5

And now the moment of truth... GPT-5 Codex Mini!

./target/debug/codex prompt "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle" -m gpt-5-codex-mini

I don't think I'll be adding that one to my SVG drawing toolkit any time soon.

Bonus: the --debug option

I had Codex add a --debug option to help me see exactly what was going on.

./target/debug/codex prompt -m gpt-5-codex-mini "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle" --debug

The output starts like this:

[codex prompt debug] POST https://chatgpt.com/backend-api/codex/responses
[codex prompt debug] Request JSON:

{
  "model": "gpt-5-codex-mini",
  "instructions": "You are Codex, based on GPT-5. You are running as a coding agent ...",
  "input": [
    {
      "type": "message",
      "role": "developer",
      "content": [
        {
          "type": "input_text",
          "text": "You are a helpful assistant. Respond directly to the user request without running tools or shell commands."
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "type": "message",
      "role": "user",
      "content": [
        {
          "type": "input_text",
          "text": "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle"
        }
      ]
    }
  ],
  "tools": [],
  "tool_choice": "auto",
  "parallel_tool_calls": false,
  "reasoning": {
    "summary": "auto"
  },
  "store": false,
  "stream": true,
  "include": [
    "reasoning.encrypted_content"
  ],
  "prompt_cache_key": "019a66bf-3e2c-7412-b05e-db9b90bbad6e"
}

This reveals that OpenAI's private API endpoint for Codex CLI is https://chatgpt.com/backend-api/codex/responses.

Also interesting is how the "instructions" key (truncated above, full copy here) contains the default instructions, without which the API appears not to work - but it also shows that you can send a message with role="developer" in advance of your user prompt.

Tags: ai, rust, openai, generative-ai, llms, ai-assisted-programming, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-release, vibe-coding, coding-agents, gpt-5, codex, gpt-codex, gpt

GPT-5 pro

2025-10-06T19:48:45+00:00

GPT-5 pro

Here's OpenAI's model documentation for their GPT-5 pro model, released to their API today at their DevDay event.

It has similar base characteristics to GPT-5: both share a September 30, 2024 knowledge cutoff and 400,000 context limit.

GPT-5 pro has maximum output tokens 272,000 max, an increase from 128,000 for GPT-5.

As our most advanced reasoning model, GPT-5 pro defaults to (and only supports) reasoning.effort: high

It's only available via OpenAI's Responses API. My LLM tool doesn't support that in core yet, but the llm-openai-plugin plugin does. I released llm-openai-plugin 0.7 adding support for the new model, then ran this:

llm install -U llm-openai-plugin
llm -m openai/gpt-5-pro "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle"

It's very, very slow. The model took 6 minutes 8 seconds to respond and charged me for 16 input and 9,205 output tokens. At $15/million input and $120/million output this pelican cost me $1.10!

Here's the full transcript. It looks visually pretty simpler to the much, much cheaper result I got from GPT-5.

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, llm-pricing, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-reasoning, llm-release, gpt-5, gpt

Quoting Scott Aaronson

2025-09-29T00:52:26+00:00

Given a week or two to try out ideas and search the literature, I’m pretty sure that Freek and I could’ve solved this problem ourselves. Instead, though, I simply asked GPT5-Thinking. After five minutes, it gave me something confident, plausible-looking, and (I could tell) wrong. But rather than laughing at the silly AI like a skeptic might do, I told GPT5 how I knew it was wrong. It thought some more, apologized, and tried again, and gave me something better. So it went for a few iterations, much like interacting with a grad student or colleague. [...]

Now, in September 2025, I’m here to tell you that AI has finally come for what my experience tells me is the most quintessentially human of all human intellectual activities: namely, proving oracle separations between quantum complexity classes. Right now, it almost certainly can’t write the whole research paper (at least if you want it to be correct and good), but it can help you get unstuck if you otherwise know what you’re doing, which you might call a sweet spot.

— Scott Aaronson, UT Austin Quantum Information Center

Tags: quantum-computing, ai, generative-ai, llms, llm-reasoning, gpt-5, gpt

GPT-5-Codex

2025-09-23T23:59:20+00:00

GPT-5-Codex

OpenAI half-released this model earlier this month, adding it to their Codex CLI tool but not their API.

Today they've fixed that - the new model can now be accessed as gpt-5-codex. It's priced the same as regular GPT-5: $1.25/million input tokens, $10/million output tokens, and the same hefty 90% discount for previously cached input tokens, especially important for agentic tool-using workflows which quickly produce a lengthy conversation.

It's only available via their Responses API, which means you currently need to install the llm-openai-plugin to use it with LLM:

llm install -U llm-openai-plugin
llm -m openai/gpt-5-codex -T llm_version 'What is the LLM version?'

Outputs:

The installed LLM version is 0.27.1.

I added tool support to that plugin today, mostly authored by GPT-5 Codex itself using OpenAI's Codex CLI.

The new prompting guide for GPT-5-Codex is worth a read.

GPT-5-Codex is purpose-built for Codex CLI, the Codex IDE extension, the Codex cloud environment, and working in GitHub, and also supports versatile tool use. We recommend using GPT-5-Codex only for agentic and interactive coding use cases.

Because the model is trained specifically for coding, many best practices you once had to prompt into general purpose models are built in, and over prompting can reduce quality.

The core prompting principle for GPT-5-Codex is “less is more.”

I tried my pelican benchmark at a cost of 2.156 cents.

llm -m openai/gpt-5-codex "Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle"

I asked Codex to describe this image and it correctly identified it as a pelican!

llm -m openai/gpt-5-codex -a https://static.simonwillison.net/static/2025/gpt-5-codex-api-pelican.png \
  -s 'Write very detailed alt text'

Cartoon illustration of a cream-colored pelican with a large orange beak and tiny black eye riding a minimalist dark-blue bicycle. The bird’s wings are tucked in, its legs resemble orange stick limbs pushing the pedals, and its tail feathers trail behind with light blue motion streaks to suggest speed. A small coral-red tongue sticks out of the pelican’s beak. The bicycle has thin light gray spokes, and the background is a simple pale blue gradient with faint curved lines hinting at ground and sky.

Tags: ai, openai, prompt-engineering, generative-ai, llms, ai-assisted-programming, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-reasoning, llm-release, gpt-5, codex, gpt-codex, gpt

GPT‑5-Codex and upgrades to Codex

2025-09-15T18:55:35+00:00

GPT‑5-Codex and upgrades to Codex

OpenAI half-released a new model today: GPT‑5-Codex, a fine-tuned GPT-5 variant explicitly designed for their various AI-assisted programming tools.

Update: OpenAI call it a "version of GPT-5", they don't explicitly describe it as a fine-tuned model. Calling it a fine-tune was my mistake here.

I say half-released because it's not yet available via their API, but they "plan to make GPT‑5-Codex available in the API soon".

I wrote about the confusing array of OpenAI products that share the name Codex a few months ago. This new model adds yet another, though at least "GPT-5-Codex" (using two hyphens) is unambiguous enough not to add to much more to the confusion.

At this point it's best to think of Codex as OpenAI's brand name for their coding family of models and tools.

The new model is already integrated into their VS Code extension, the Codex CLI and their Codex Cloud asynchronous coding agent. I'd been calling that last one "Codex Web" but I think Codex Cloud is a better name since it can also be accessed directly from their iPhone app.

Codex Cloud also has a new feature: you can configure it to automatically run code review against specific GitHub repositories (I found that option on chatgpt.com/codex/settings/code-review) and it will create a temporary container to use as part of those reviews. Here's the relevant documentation.

Some documented features of the new GPT-5-Codex model:

Specifically trained for code review, which directly supports their new code review feature.
"GPT‑5-Codex adapts how much time it spends thinking more dynamically based on the complexity of the task." Simple tasks (like "list files in this directory") should run faster. Large, complex tasks should use run for much longer - OpenAI report Codex crunching for seven hours in some cases!
Increased score on their proprietary "code refactoring evaluation" from 33.9% for GPT-5 (high) to 51.3% for GPT-5-Codex (high). It's hard to evaluate this without seeing the details of the eval but it does at least illustrate that refactoring performance is something they've focused on here.
"GPT‑5-Codex also shows significant improvements in human preference evaluations when creating mobile websites" - in the past I've habitually prompted models to "make it mobile-friendly", maybe I don't need to do that any more.
"We find that comments by GPT‑5-Codex are less likely to be incorrect or unimportant" - I originally misinterpreted this as referring to comments in code but it's actually about comments left on code reviews.

The system prompt for GPT-5-Codex in Codex CLI is worth a read. It's notably shorter than the system prompt for other models - here's a diff.

Here's the section of the updated system prompt that talks about comments:

Add succinct code comments that explain what is going on if code is not self-explanatory. You should not add comments like "Assigns the value to the variable", but a brief comment might be useful ahead of a complex code block that the user would otherwise have to spend time parsing out. Usage of these comments should be rare.

Theo Browne has a video review of the model and accompanying features. He was generally impressed but noted that it was surprisingly bad at using the Codex CLI search tool to navigate code. Hopefully that's something that can fix with a system prompt update.

Finally, can it drew a pelican riding a bicycle? Without API access I instead got Codex Cloud to have a go by prompting:

Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle, save as pelican.svg

Here's the result:

Tags: code-review, ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, ai-assisted-programming, pelican-riding-a-bicycle, llm-release, coding-agents, async-coding-agents, gpt-5, codex, theo-browne, gpt-codex, gpt

Models can prompt now

2025-09-14T20:25:21+00:00

Here's an interesting example of models incrementally improving over time: I am finding that today's leading models are competent at writing prompts for themselves and each other.

A year ago I was quite skeptical of the pattern where models are used to help build prompts. Prompt engineering was still a young enough discipline that I did not expect the models to have enough training data to be able to prompt themselves better than a moderately experienced human.

The Claude 4 and GPT-5 families both have training cut-off dates within the past year - recent enough that they've seen a decent volume of good prompting examples.

I expect they have also been deliberately trained for this. Anthropic make extensive use of sub-agent patterns in Claude Code, and published a fascinating article on that pattern (my notes on that).

I don't have anything solid to back this up - it's more of a hunch based on anecdotal evidence where various of my requests for a model to write a prompt have returned useful results over the last few months.

Tags: ai, prompt-engineering, generative-ai, llms, anthropic, claude, claude-4, claude-code, gpt-5, gpt

gpt-5 and gpt-5-mini rate limit updates

2025-09-12T23:14:46+00:00

gpt-5 and gpt-5-mini rate limit updates

OpenAI have increased the rate limits for their two main GPT-5 models. These look significant:

gpt-5
Tier 1: 30K → 500K TPM (1.5M batch)
Tier 2: 450K → 1M (3M batch)
Tier 3: 800K → 2M
Tier 4: 2M → 4M

gpt-5-mini
Tier 1: 200K → 500K (5M batch)

GPT-5 rate limits here show tier 5 stays at 40M tokens per minute. The GPT-5 mini rate limits for tiers 2 through 5 are 2M, 4M, 10M and 180M TPM respectively.

As a reminder, those tiers are assigned based on how much money you have spent on the OpenAI API - from $5 for tier 1 up through $50, $100, $250 and then $1,000 for tier

For comparison, Anthropic's current top tier is Tier 4 ($400 spent) which provides 2M maximum input tokens per minute and 400,000 maximum output tokens, though you can contact their sales team for higher limits than that.

Gemini's top tier is Tier 3 for $1,000 spent and currently gives you 8M TPM for Gemini 2.5 Pro and Flash and 30M TPM for the Flash-Lite and 2.0 Flash models.

So OpenAI's new rate limit increases for their top performing model pulls them ahead of Anthropic but still leaves them significantly behind Gemini.

GPT-5 mini remains the champion for smaller models with that enormous 180M TPS limit for its top tier.

Tags: ai, openai, generative-ai, llms, anthropic, gemini, llm-pricing, gpt-5, gpt

Recreating the Apollo AI adoption rate chart with GPT-5, Python and Pyodide

2025-09-09T06:47:49+00:00

Apollo Global Management's "Chief Economist" Dr. Torsten Sløk released this interesting chart which appears to show a slowdown in AI adoption rates among large (>250 employees) companies:

Here's the full description that accompanied the chart:

The US Census Bureau conducts a biweekly survey of 1.2 million firms, and one question is whether a business has used AI tools such as machine learning, natural language processing, virtual agents or voice recognition to help produce goods or services in the past two weeks. Recent data by firm size shows that AI adoption has been declining among companies with more than 250 employees, see chart below.

(My first thought on seeing that chart is that I hope it represents the peak of inflated expectations leading into the trough of dissillusionment in the Gartner Hype Cycle (which Wikipedia calls "largely disputed, with studies pointing to it being inconsistently true at best"), since that means we might be reaching the end of the initial hype phase and heading towards the slope of enlightenment.)

Finding the US Census data with GPT-5 search

This is the first I'd heard of the US Census Bureau running a biweekly (that's once every two weeks) survey about AI!

I decided to track down the numbers and see if I could recreate the chart myself. And since GPT-5 is really good at search now I fed it the following prompt to see how well it could do:

> The US Census Bureau conducts a biweekly survey of 1.2 million firms, and one question is whether a business has used AI tools such as machine learning, natural language processing, virtual agents or voice recognition to help produce goods or services in the past two weeks. Recent data by firm size shows that AI adoption has been declining among companies with more than 250 employees, see chart below.

Find me that original data

It took 1m19s to find exactly what I needed:

Here’s the original U.S. Census Bureau source for that series:

BTOS “Employment size class” time series (XLSX) — biweekly shares of firms answering Yes to “In the last two weeks, did this business use Artificial Intelligence (AI) in producing goods or services?”, broken out by firm-size buckets (incl. 250+ employees). Coverage: Sep 11, 2023 → Aug 24, 2025. (Census.gov) [...]

That Census page was not at all obvious. Thankfully GPT-5 had tipped me off to the "Employment size class" file, this link here:

So I downloaded that file, and confirmed that it was indeed a spreadsheet containing the data I wanted (in among all sorts of other survey questions). Here's a 374KB XLSX copy of the file I downloaded.

Recreating the chart with GPT-5 code interpreter

So what should I do with it now? I decided to see if GPT-5 could turn the spreadsheet back into that original chart, using Python running in its code interpreter tool.

So I uploaded the XLSX file back to ChatGPT, dropped in a screenshot of the Apollo chart and prompted:

Use this data to recreate this chart using python

I thought this was a pretty tall order, but it's always worth throwing big challenges at an LLM to learn from how well it does.

It really worked hard on this. I didn't time it exactly but it spent at least 7 minutes "reasoning" across 5 different thinking blocks, interspersed with over a dozen Python analysis sessions. It used pandas and numpy to explore the uploaded spreadsheet and find the right figures, then tried several attempts at plotting with matplotlib.

As far as I can tell GPT-5 in ChatGPT can now feed charts it creates back into its own vision model, because it appeared to render a broken (empty) chart and then keep on trying to get it working.

It found a data dictionary in the last tab of the spreadsheet and used that to build a lookup table matching the letters A through G to the actual employee size buckets.

At the end of the process it spat out this chart:

At first glance I thought it had nailed it... but then I compared the chart more closely with the Apollo original and spotted some definite discrepancies. GPT-5's chart peaked at 14.5% but the highest value in Apollo's was more like 13.5%. The GPT-5 chart was spikier - and most interestingly it included a clear uptick in the last data point where Apollo's had trended downwards.

I decided it was time to look at the actual data. I opened up the spreadsheet in Numbers, found the AI question columns and manually reviewed them. They seemed to match the GPT-5 chart results - so why the difference to Apollo's?

Then I noticed a crucial detail in the Apollo chart that I had cropped out of my original screenshot!

Note: Data is six-survey moving average.

So I told ChatGPT:

Do the first question, plot it as a six survey rolling average

I asked for the first question because it turned out there were two that were relevant in the survey spreadsheet.

In the last two weeks, did this business use Artificial Intelligence (AI) in producing goods or services? (Examples of AI: machine learning, natural language processing, virtual agents, voice recognition, etc.)
During the next six months, do you think this business will be using Artificial Intelligence (AI) in producing goods or services? (Examples of AI: machine learning, natural language processing, virtual agents, voice recognition, etc.)

It churned away for a little longer, added this code to the script:

# Compute 6-survey rolling average (biweekly cadence → ~12 weeks)
rolled = wide.rolling(window=6, min_periods=6).mean()

And popped out this chart (after I told it to fix the glitch in the title):

I think it's done it! This is a very solid match for the Apollo original, recreated using matplotlib and pandas from the same underlying source data from the US Census.

Here's the full Python code it wrote, which I think is quite readable (in as much as Pandas code can be):

import pandas as pd
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt
from matplotlib.ticker import PercentFormatter

path = "/mnt/data/Employment Size Class.xlsx"

resp = pd.read_excel(path, sheet_name="Response Estimates")
dates = pd.read_excel(path, sheet_name="Collection and Reference Dates")

is_current = resp["Question"].astype(str).str.strip().str.startswith("In the last two weeks")
ai_yes = resp[is_current & resp["Answer"].astype(str).str.strip().str.lower().eq("yes")].copy()

code_to_bucket = {"A":"1-4","B":"5-9","C":"10-19","D":"20-49","E":"50-99","F":"100-249","G":"250 or more employees"}
ai_yes["Bucket"] = ai_yes["Empsize"].map(code_to_bucket)

period_cols = [c for c in ai_yes.columns if str(c).isdigit() and len(str(c))==6]
long = ai_yes.melt(id_vars=["Bucket"], value_vars=period_cols, var_name="Smpdt", value_name="value")

dates["Smpdt"] = dates["Smpdt"].astype(str)
long["Smpdt"] = long["Smpdt"].astype(str)
merged = long.merge(dates[["Smpdt","Ref End"]], on="Smpdt", how="left")
merged["date"] = pd.to_datetime(merged["Ref End"], errors="coerce")

merged["value"] = pd.to_numeric(long["value"].astype(str).str.replace("%","",regex=False).str.strip(), errors="coerce")

order = ["250 or more employees","100-249","50-99","20-49","10-19","5-9","1-4"]
wide = merged.pivot_table(index="date", columns="Bucket", values="value", aggfunc="mean").sort_index()
wide = wide[[c for c in order if c in wide.columns]]
rolled = wide.rolling(window=6, min_periods=6).mean()

start, end = pd.Timestamp("2023-11-01"), pd.Timestamp("2025-08-31")
rolled_win = rolled.loc[(rolled.index >= start) & (rolled.index <= end)]

fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(12, 6))
for col in order:
    if col in rolled_win.columns:
        ax.plot(rolled_win.index, rolled_win[col], label=col, linewidth=2)

ax.set_title("AI adoption (last two weeks) — 6‑survey rolling average", pad=16)
ax.yaxis.set_major_formatter(PercentFormatter(100))
ax.set_ylabel("%")
ax.set_xlabel("")
ax.grid(True, alpha=0.25, linestyle="--")
ax.legend(title=None, loc="upper left", ncols=2, frameon=False)
plt.tight_layout()

png_path = "/mnt/data/ai_adoption_rolling6_by_firm_size.png"
svg_path = "/mnt/data/ai_adoption_rolling6_by_firm_size.svg"
plt.savefig(png_path, dpi=200, bbox_inches="tight")
plt.savefig(svg_path, bbox_inches="tight")

I like how it generated an SVG version of the chart without me even asking for it.

You can access the ChatGPT transcript to see full details of everything it did.

Rendering that chart client-side using Pyodide

I had one more challenge to try out. Could I render that same chart entirely in the browser using Pyodide, which can execute both Pandas and Matplotlib?

I fired up a new ChatGPT GPT-5 session and prompted:

Build a canvas that loads Pyodide and uses it to render an example bar chart with pandas and matplotlib and then displays that on the page

My goal here was simply to see if I could get a proof of concept of a chart rendered, ideally using the Canvas feature of ChatGPT. Canvas is OpenAI's version of Claude Artifacts, which lets the model write and then execute HTML and JavaScript directly in the ChatGPT interface.

It worked! Here's the transcript and here's what it built me, exported to my tools.simonwillison.net GitHub Pages site (source code here).

I've now proven to myself that I can render those Python charts directly in the browser. Next step: recreate the Apollo chart.

I knew it would need a way to load the spreadsheet that was CORS-enabled. I uploaded my copy to my /static/cors-allow/2025/... directory (configured in Cloudflare to serve CORS headers), pasted in the finished plotting code from earlier and told ChatGPT:

Now update it to have less explanatory text and a less exciting design (black on white is fine) and run the equivalent of this:

(... pasted in Python code from earlier ...)

Load the XLSX sheet from https://static.simonwillison.net/static/cors-allow/2025/Employment-Size-Class-Sep-2025.xlsx

It didn't quite work - I got an error about openpyxl which I manually researched the fix for and prompted:

Use await micropip.install("openpyxl") to install openpyxl - instead of using loadPackage

I had to paste in another error message:

zipfile.BadZipFile: File is not a zip file

Then one about a SyntaxError: unmatched ')' and a TypeError: Legend.__init__() got an unexpected keyword argument 'ncols' - copying and pasting error messages remains a frustrating but necessary part of the vibe-coding loop.

... but with those fixes in place, the resulting code worked! Visit tools.simonwillison.net/ai-adoption to see the final result:

Here's the code for that page, 170 lines all-in of HTML, CSS, JavaScript and Python.

What I've learned from this

This was another of those curiosity-inspired investigations that turned into a whole set of useful lessons.

GPT-5 is great at tracking down US Census data, no matter how difficult their site is to understand if you don't work with their data often
It can do a very good job of turning data + a screenshot of a chart into a recreation of that chart using code interpreter, Pandas and matplotlib
Running Python + matplotlib in a browser via Pyodide is very easy and only takes a few dozen lines of code

Fetching an XLSX sheet into Pyodide is only a small extra step using pyfetch and openpyxl:

import micropip
await micropip.install("openpyxl")
from pyodide.http import pyfetch
resp_fetch = await pyfetch(URL)
wb_bytes = await resp_fetch.bytes()
xf = pd.ExcelFile(io.BytesIO(wb_bytes), engine='openpyxl')

Another new-to-me pattern: you can render an image to the DOM from Pyodide code like this:

from js import document
document.getElementById('plot').src = 'data:image/png;base64,' + img_b64

I will most definitely be using these techniques again in future.

Update: Coincidentally Claude released their own upgraded equivalent to ChatGPT Code Interpreter later on the day that I published this story, so I ran the same chart recreation experiment against Claude Sonnet 4 to see how it compared.

Tags: census, data-journalism, javascript, python, tools, visualization, ai, pyodide, openai, generative-ai, chatgpt, llms, ai-assisted-programming, code-interpreter, llm-reasoning, vibe-coding, ai-assisted-search, gpt-5, gpt

Anthropic status: Model output quality

2025-09-09T06:28:21+00:00

Anthropic status: Model output quality

Anthropic previously reported model serving bugs that affected Claude Opus 4 and 4.1 for 56.5 hours. They've now fixed additional bugs affecting "a small percentage" of Sonnet 4 requests for almost a month, plus a less long-lived Haiku 3.5 issue:

Resolved issue 1 - A small percentage of Claude Sonnet 4 requests experienced degraded output quality due to a bug from Aug 5-Sep 4, with the impact increasing from Aug 29-Sep 4. A fix has been rolled out and this incident has been resolved.

Resolved issue 2 - A separate bug affected output quality for some Claude Haiku 3.5 and Claude Sonnet 4 requests from Aug 26-Sep 5. A fix has been rolled out and this incident has been resolved.

They directly address accusations that these stem from deliberate attempts to save money on serving models:

Importantly, we never intentionally degrade model quality as a result of demand or other factors, and the issues mentioned above stem from unrelated bugs.

The timing of these issues is really unfortunate, corresponding with the rollout of GPT-5 which I see as the non-Anthropic model to feel truly competitive with Claude for writing code since their release of Claude 3.5 back in June last year.

Via @theo

Tags: ai, generative-ai, llms, anthropic, claude, claude-4, gpt-5, gpt

Load Llama-3.2 WebGPU in your browser from a local folder

2025-09-08T20:53:52+00:00

Load Llama-3.2 WebGPU in your browser from a local folder

Inspired by a comment on Hacker News I decided to see if it was possible to modify the transformers.js-examples/tree/main/llama-3.2-webgpu Llama 3.2 chat demo (online here, I wrote about it last November) to add an option to open a local model file directly from a folder on disk, rather than waiting for it to download over the network.

I posed the problem to OpenAI's GPT-5-enabled Codex CLI like this:

git clone https://github.com/huggingface/transformers.js-examples
cd transformers.js-examples/llama-3.2-webgpu
codex

Then this prompt:

Modify this application such that it offers the user a file browse button for selecting their own local copy of the model file instead of loading it over the network. Provide a "download model" option too.

Codex churned away for several minutes, even running commands like curl -sL https://raw.githubusercontent.com/huggingface/transformers.js/main/src/models.js | sed -n '1,200p' to inspect the source code of the underlying Transformers.js library.

After four prompts total (shown here) it built something which worked!

To try it out you'll need your own local copy of the Llama 3.2 ONNX model. You can get that (a ~1.2GB) download) like so:

git lfs install
git clone https://huggingface.co/onnx-community/Llama-3.2-1B-Instruct-q4f16

Then visit my llama-3.2-webgpu page in Chrome or Firefox Nightly (since WebGPU is required), click "Browse folder", select that folder you just cloned, agree to the "Upload" confirmation (confusing since nothing is uploaded from your browser, the model file is opened locally on your machine) and click "Load local model".

Here's an animated demo (recorded in real-time, I didn't speed this up):

I pushed a branch with those changes here. The next step would be to modify this to support other models in addition to the Llama 3.2 demo, but I'm pleased to have got to this proof of concept with so little work beyond throwing some prompts at Codex to see if it could figure it out.

According to the Codex /status command this used 169,818 input tokens, 17,112 output tokens and 1,176,320 cached input tokens. At current GPT-5 token pricing ($1.25/million input, $0.125/million cached input, $10/million output) that would cost 53.942 cents, but Codex CLI hooks into my existing $20/month ChatGPT Plus plan so this was bundled into that.

Via My Hacker News comment

Tags: javascript, ai, generative-ai, llama, local-llms, llms, ai-assisted-programming, transformers-js, webgpu, llm-pricing, vibe-coding, gpt-5, codex, gpt, onnx