Having used both Anthropic and OpenAI models at $work via copilot extensively, I have to say GPT 5.5 currently is best at getting work done with minimal mistakes. However, Claude Code is way ahead of OpenAI Codex in terms of harness features and tooling. MCPs, skills, sub agents, these all were pioneered in Claude Code first. Perhaps that contributed to Anthropic's success.
Considering this is from academia, there's a chance there were limitations on the available models. My research group accesses OpenAI models via Azure, and until recently (last week) the latest model was GPT 5. We just got 5.4.
The university doesn't « ban » using the OpenAI APIs directly. It's a question of funding. If you want to use OpenAI, you usually use your own account and ask the university for a refund later, where you justify your usage. It's easier for the university if you use their pre-approved Azure endpoint instead, though you'll still need approval if you're going to spend a significant amount of money.
Yes, it’s actually similar to discriminating based on race or religion, in the sense that it’s an arbitrary, meaningless criterion to discriminate on. If the Rust Bun port is better in every measurable way — passes all tests, has the same performance or better, and fixes existing bugs — then who cares what language it’s written in or how it was implemented? The point is that it’s higher quality. If you don’t trust the Bun team when they release a Rust version and give it their stamp of approval, why did you trust them when they released the Zig version two weeks ago? It makes no logical sense, and it makes the yt-dlp devs look foolish.
> If you don’t trust the Bun team when they release a Rust version and give it their stamp of approval, why did you trust them when they released the Zig version two weeks ago?
I think you cannot make this comparison because Rust version wasn’t in fact written by the Bun team. It wasn’t even read by them.
Yt-dlp devs made a good call. If Claude is good enough to rewrite millions of lines of Bun, it is good enough to maintain Bun fork of yt-dlp. And since Bun is part of Anthropic, they can afford it too.
people don’t care if it’s good. they only care it’s made with AI so they can signal their moral superiority. hence the derogatory term slop that is paraded around like it’s the way to win an argument
It's a bit of a contradiction. We understand that AI can be used usefully, and to great effect. But if someone else uses it, it's a potential liability.
I think the issue is, we understand our own usage of it, and respect the boundaries of what's possible and what needs to be done to use these tools properly.
But we don't know how the other guy is using it.
We don't know if they're being responsible, and using it in a safe manner.
If they are: great. But if they aren't, we're opening ourselves up to all kinds of security shenanigans.
It's one of those things where we're only going to be okay with it, if we're the ones using it. But that also means other people will be suspect of our code.
It's really a no win scenario, except for inside each of own little bubbles.
https://benjdd.com/languages/
reply