60 comments

[ 9.2 ms ] story [ 116 ms ] thread
Why didn't the review process spot this obvious error? Oh wait ... @codex review this
I don't understand how Codex can blunder so badly. I imagine that even if they would be using vibe-coding, surely they must have some good engineers. So why is there such severe bugs?

One can argue that these products are the flagship products of their respective AI companies aside from the AI models themselves of course.

I imagine that this story will be picked up by the news left and right, some stories just feel this way and this one is like that (given 12 upvotes on HN in 7 minutes)

The only logical conclusion (from this incident) that I can have is: An (vibe-coded?) product is hard to maintain even for some of the best engineers and is bound to have severe bugs.

2. Proper testing and taking issues seriously is the key if you still wish to do this and there isn't much. This is a week old issue which I can only classify as severe.

I wish to keep an nuanced opinion about it but oh this is bad for openAI (not as bad as them accepting autonomous AI within drones and mass surveillance though)

My point is: AI has both uphills and downward valleys and cliffs. It might as well just accelerate you, which could be, towards your downfall as well. Its recommended to keep an eye while driving and not drive too fast.

AI companies might be like car companies which don't offer a brake pedal.

"Vibe coding" implies minimal to no human involvement. It doesn't matter how good of an engineer the person who typed the prompt was, they were not involved in writing or reviewing the code, so the end result will not reflect their skill. The whole point of vibe coding is making software engineers irrelevant.

People like to go on about how "good engineers review their AI code" but that's just not what's happening in reality. Not only is reviewing large amounts of AI generated code unpleasant and mentally taxing, it also negates most of the perceived productivity boost, so people are simply not doing it.

> Proper testing

There is no formal testing that would be expected to catch an issue like this. It can barely be classified as a bug, the logging is working as intended, just with negative side effects that weren't accounted for.

The only real way to proactively prevent an issue like this is for a human programmer to stop and think about this code as they're writing it and go "hmm, we're logging large amounts of data to disk at a fast pace here, this may be a bad idea". Without human involvement, this is just going to keep happening. All vibe coded software is bloated and unstable, I have yet to see a single counter-example.

> I don't understand how Codex can blunder so badly. I imagine that even if they would be using vibe-coding, surely they must have some good engineers. So why is there such severe bugs?

I'd say this is also partly a problem of working under intense pressure and the demand to work faster and faster - even faster now with "AI". All these companies are competing with each other very aggressively and are driving their employees like horses in order to win the "AI" race.

Blegh, I puke every time I see obviously AI generated comments in GH PR's. You cannot assume any of these people have done their research, other than telling Codex to do it for them
Codex is one of the most infamous examples of slopware. Just having the window unhidden on my mac will cause it to use 100% of the GPU displaying the spinner message.

THE SPINNER MESSAGE CAUSES 100% GPU USAGE ON AN MBP M5!!

So any time you're waiting on the model (which is 90% of the time), your fans will be blasting (careful, don't use it on battery).

The issue is on github and close to 6 months old. Probably since the release of vibe coded junk. I would literally fix it myself but it's closed source for whatever reason.

There are many discussions about which model is better, or if vibe coding is even possible. I point you to the extent of what one of the most well funded, money flush, well staffed model making companies can do with vibe coding.

To me a screwup this bad (where the CEO has already made it clear they're now "focussing on coding") indicates that there's something truly broken in the company. No one on polymarket expects them to have a leading model any time soon for example.

It's a tragedy. The world needs competition to anthropic.

> THE SPINNER MESSAGE CAUSES 100% GPU USAGE ON AN MBP M5!!

One conspiratorial idea I had was that this isn't a bug, and that Codex was actually doing computation on users' hardware under the guise of "thinking". Like Folding@home, or bitcoin mining malware, involuntarily on paying customers. Your usage is being subsidized by your personal compute hardware that you can't take advantage of unless it was being applied at massive scale.

This would make even more sense when you consider that thinking and response time metrics aren't publicly being tracked. There is an assumption that LLM interaction is being processed as fast as possible, but this doesn't align with the reality of fixed hardware and oversubscription. Of course throttling is occurring. So, if you can take advantage of local compute, delay the responses and you have even more access compute!

I find it difficult to believe that given the scale, number of users, and money involved, that someone hasn't fixed this "bug".

I have been wondering why my battery dies quickly when I have codex open, even in my tray

I only noticed the CPU spike with Process Explorer also in my tray.

> THE SPINNER MESSAGE CAUSES 100% GPU USAGE ON AN MBP M5!!

Is that m5 specific? I’m not seeing on my m4 and I use codex (desktop and cli) quite a bit.

Excel would use 100% CPU if you left a cell selected and your screen saver turned on because you were idle.

That bug caused untold grief for multi-user session hosts / terminal servers / Citrix XenApp for a better part of a decade. Way before slopware!

People forget that software written by people is… even worse.

It’s like the self driving car debate: sure, the robot taxis will kill people on occasion, but people kill people regularly.

> THE SPINNER MESSAGE CAUSES 100% GPU USAGE ON AN MBP M5!!

Ah, so they ported that feature over from ChatGPT?

> it's closed source for whatever reason.

When working in an organization that defaulted to open sourcing everything, (even side projects,) there was only one reason any of us would keep something closed — embarrassment. Nobody wants to be the public face of some garbage code base. I’m sure that’s triply true when you’re using that code to justify exorbitant pricing.

Back in the early days, people were saying the world needs Anthropic as a competitor to ChatGPT. Full circle.
If you think this about Codex, I'd be curious to hear your opinion on Claude Code.

Claude Code eats RAM on my Macbook Pro like no other app I've experienced, Codex on the other hand seems way more performant, more consistent, less memory usage, less CPU usage etc.

I've read to restart iTerm2 and my Mac several times because of Claude Code weirdness.

If something like this is helpful or necessary, that’s what ram backed tmpfs is for.
i hope they find the smoking gun, the key insight, the kicker.
This thread will become a typical "haha slop company made slop" but I've been bitten by a bug exactly like this before in a (pre-AI, artisan) OSS project. The maintainer there didn't properly account for DST when calculating last backup time, so the app started and never stopped writing/re-writing backups continuously.

Perhaps the framing shouldn't be "haha slop" but rather why doesn't the AI write better quality software than we do? To which the answer is obvious IMO -- even emergent properties can't elevate AI intelligence too far above the training dataset. So how do we get to superintelligent (or at least "not-wreck-your-NVMe-endurance-telligent") AI, if we, as a whole, are not smart enough ourselves?

Judge not the slop-bot, lest ye be judged yourself, engineer.

I've been bitten by this bug for several days, to the point where I had had to write a script to delete the WAL so that my server would stop getting locked up from a lack of disk space from codex logging.

You can find it here: https://github.com/openai/codex/issues/28224#issuecomment-47...

I have been making noise about this bug for a week, so I'm glad to see this is blowing up on HN.

The first of many bugs that are beyond the complexity of its authors, thanks to comprehension debt.

Even with tests, the more complex the code base is, the more risky it is to vibe-code on it without introducing more bugs [0] and increasing the debt. Does not matter if the CI is green or if all the tests pass.

It gets even worse if you can't explain the change / pull request or what the implications are after applying that "suggested" fix.

[0] https://sketch.dev/blog/our-first-outage-from-llm-written-co...

(comment deleted)
I'm struggling with how this much logging information could be generated at any level of verbosity. Is codex writing log entries while it's sitting idle? Why would someone want to look at these logs?
Vibe coding takes "move fast and break things" to a whole nother level.
The operating system has historically trusted the applications not to do dumb things too much.

Only now we're witnessing the consequences much more frequently thanks to accelerated slop.

Shocking. Been open a week and AFAICT just silence from OpenAI. I just find it baffling. You'd think that these vendors would be very sensitive to this sort of issue. I mean, surely they have multiple agents hooked up to github monitoring potential issues and proposing fixes, right? ...right?

Surely it should be trivial for them to have their own tools spinning away trying to fix all the github issues in real time...

There have been Issues on Github about the same problem since April. I'm using Codex a lot and I'm very happy with its performance (UX and output), but it's baffling they haven't fixed this problem.
Can someone tell me if the current sub-agent of codex is available now? There used to always be a spinning issue.
This is actually such a classic blunder (shipping trace/debug logging on for everything), but funnily the impact is not in a normal way.

It's crazy we have hit a point where memory, CPU speed and disk speed isn't getting clapped because a Dev shipped logging at trace level instead of what used to the application being catastrophically slow so its immediately fixed in the next update.

I want to like codex, but the quality is just not very good, especially when compared to Claude.

It used to work okay, but a while back they landed a major regression for an entire team of folks I work with.

No response, no workaround.

https://github.com/openai/codex/issues/23762

Decent sandbox + sandbox override experience with pi coding agent... pi-sandbox uses the same sandbox tech that claude code uses, although it uses a fork that's a little behind, and I'm not sure exactly why it uses a fork.

You can install pi, then install pi-sandbox locked to the current version. Here it is described how pi-sandbox plus an additional extension allow you to have the experience where a sandbox is used, but you can fall back to unsandboxed with approval required. https://github.com/carderne/pi-sandbox/issues/50

Somebody please donate some tokens to this plucky startup, they need our help.
OpenAI really snatched defeat from the jaws of victory late last year when Claude Code was a laggy mess.

Nowadays Codex has typing latency out of the gate, whereas Claude Code has the odd pause but generally displays my key presses as … you know … I press them.

(comment deleted)
Same issue with Claude Code btw — it writes massive debug logs to ~/.claude/logs. Had to symlink it to a tmpfs to stop wearing out my SSD.
I have noticed absurd lag from the browser usage and sometimes complete bricking of my network too on my computer. I thought it was just my computer getting old, but possibly it's ChatGPT.