Simon WillisonModify

2025-09-17 04:39:41

Announcing the 2025 PSF Board Election Results!

Jannis Leidel was also re-elected and Abigail Dogbe and Sheena O’Connell will be joining the board for the first time.

Tags: python, psf

2025-09-16 05:03:33

I thought I had an verbal agreement with them, that “Varnish Cache” was the FOSS project and “Varnish Software” was the commercial entitity, but the current position of Varnish Software’s IP-lawyers is that nobody can use “Varnish Cache” in any context, without their explicit permission. [...]

We have tried to negotiatiate with Varnish Software for many months about this issue, but their IP-Lawyers still insist that Varnish Software owns the Varnish Cache name, and at most we have being offered a strictly limited, subject to their veto, permission for the FOSS project to use the “Varnish Cache” name.

We cannot live with that: We are independent FOSS project with our own name.

So we will change the name of the project.

The new association and the new project will be named “The Vinyl Cache Project”, and this release 8.0.0, will be the last under the “Varnish Cache” name.

— Poul-Henning Kamp, Varnish 8.0.0 release notes

Tags: open-source, varnish, copyright

2025-09-16 02:55:35

GPT‑5-Codex and upgrades to Codex

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

2025-09-15 04:25:21

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

2025-09-13 07:14:46

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

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

2025-09-13 05:59:33

The trick with Claude Code is to give it large, but not too large, extremely well defined problems.

(If the problems are too large then you are now vibe coding… which (a) frequently goes wrong, and (b) is a one-way street: once vibes enter your app, you end up with tangled, write-only code which functions perfectly but can no longer be edited by humans. Great for prototyping, bad for foundations.)

— Matt Webb, What I think about when I think about Claude Code

Tags: matt-webb, claude, ai, claude-code, llms, vibe-coding, coding-agents, ai-assisted-programming, generative-ai