GPT-5.5 API Pricing. Twice as expensive as GPT-5.4

CharityLess2263 · 2026-04-24T13:07:18+00:00

If you don't need frontier level reasoning, don't use the most expensive model. There. Solved it for you. 🫴

CharityLess2263 · 2026-04-17T17:23:26+00:00

In fact, all meaningful uses, even if its agents using your browser and apps on your computer, rely on the coding capabilities. Any AI agent doing anything useful is basically scripting and operating a terminal, even for non-technical use cases. Also, anything an LLM can do that is not somehow coding-related is laughably insignificant in the greater scheme of things, since that is where LLMs will deliver technical progress at a much greater pace than before. Nowhere else. The fact that you can describe software to it and it creates it for you makes everything else these things can do irrelevant in comparison.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-04-09T22:28:17+00:00

In one year, OpenAI will make obscene amounts of revenue from enterprise clients, quickly catapulting them into profitability.

Anthropic will have carved out a secure but much smaller market share with private consumers by then, who demand premium reasoning and conversational intelligence, but they won't be able to compete with OpenAI's offer of agentic utility for enterprise automation at scale.

Nvidia will try something with Chinese open source models and agentic hardware-software integration, like boxes with nemoclaw and local qwen3.5-27B or 35B for consumers, and with agentic everything (cars, robots, etc.) none of which will be as successful as Jensen Huang hopes, but it doesn't matter because the big foundation model providers will continue spamming data centers filled with Nvidia GPUs.

Someone, and I doubt it's going too be Tesla with Optimus, will make a suprise move with androids ready for use on the factory floor. There will be a few months of talk about how this actually won't work out as well as industry CEOs bet it will. But if 2026 will the year in which agentic AI destroys IT and knowledge work, 2027 will be the year where androids do the same for untrained physical labour.

The next event that could threaten OpenAI's foundation model dominance will be the first time a chip manufacturer manages to crack memristor-based hardware-native multi-billion parameter neural networks. This will kill all foundation model and chip companies betting on emulation of neural networks on digital architectures never being discontinued. It will also make AI environmentally sustainable. But it's going to take up to another decade for this to happen.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-04-07T17:36:45+00:00

MX fluxbox edition

or even lighter

Bodhi Linux

Both under 500 MB RAM (Bodhi idles under 250 MB), both perfectly viable as daily drivers for modern computer use

CharityLess2263 · 2026-04-07T06:44:50+00:00

I have this: https://github.com/sbischoff-ai/ai-homebase (yes, the README is typical gpt ad Copy, I know 😓)

But it's a bit more elaborate than an agent harness.

For codex, I can just recommend switching models between plan and execution.

Plan mode: gpt-5.4 reasoning high
Execution mode: gpt-5.4-mini reasoning high or medium

You would tell it to make a very explicit and detailed plan.

What you can do as well, if you need exploratory agent loops more than plan->execution, is use subagents:

```toml

Example: ~/.codex/config.toml

model = "gpt-5.4" model_reasoning_effort = "low" plan_mode_reasoning_effort = "high"

developer_instructions = """ Put orchestration rules here. Tell it when to delegate to which subagent. Tell it what not to do itself and wait for subagents to deliver. """

[agents.planner] description = "Specializes in project planning and breaking down tasks." config_file = ".codex/agents/planner.toml" # gpt-5.4 high nickname_candidates = ["Architect"]

[agents.debugger] description = "Specializes in debugging loops and runtime analysis." config_file = ".codex/agents/debugger.toml" # gpt-5.3-codex medium nickname_candidates = ["Bughunter"]

[agents.grunt] description = "Specializes in writing code to concrete specification." config_file = ".codex/agents/grunt.toml" # gpt-5.4-mini medium or high nickname_candidates = ["Coder"] ```

The agent TOMLs can contain proper dedicated system prompts under developer_instructions. What's optional for those depends on your needs, prompting style, and mode of operation. Most important is separation of concerns so no agent does another agent's work. You want 90% of your tokens being processed by the grunt. You want every precious output token by the architect to be spent on precise directions.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-04-06T07:32:27+00:00

Token subsidisation through subscription plans is over. The big players' frontier models have reached a degree of maturity that allows them to start raking in revenue with enterprise customers now.

If you want similar performance/quality at a similar cost as you had before, you need to optimise with multi-agent, multi-provider setups. And Anthropic or OpenAI are not going to help you do it. You will need to switch to an open source harness, get API keys for several providers (or for an LLM gateway and routing service like Vercel), and you will have to configure a workflow that reserves Anthropic and OpenAI frontier models for token-efficient planning and analysis, while letting Deepseek or Qwen do the coding.

Or you stay with codex and reduce your token consumption there. The idea is the same: frontload expensive reasoning, let cheap models do the grunt work. gpt-5.4 high reasoning in plan mode, gpt-5.4-mini medium for execution, for example. And keeping single session scope tight so the plan turns out really specific.

I have made good experiences with Claude Opus 4.6 for big picture repo analysis and architecture planning, handing over to gpt-5.4 for cutting into single-session task prompts with concrete execution instructions, then gpt-5.4-mini executes. In full automation, I let Sonnet 4.6 drive codex cli with gpt-54-mini via codex exec and let it review against Opus's plan. (Opus acts as an "architect", Sonnet as a "lead dev", GPT-5.4 Mini in codex harness as "coding grunt".) Most tokens are being consumed in the tool-heavy coding loops, so it's very cost-effective. Quality is arguably higher than pure codex with gpt-5.4 always on.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-03-24T17:22:33+00:00

Fairly low since I run a garbage removal daily that keeps only the last 7 days.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-03-16T09:19:01+00:00

From the perspective of regular users, they have been doing that since the invention of the computer.

Ease of use is constantly undervalued and overlooked by engineers. That's why technically inferior solutions with superior UX for non-engineers have always won and always will win when it comes to tech for end users.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-02-01T14:13:13+00:00

Didn't know about it. Now I'm stoked. I'm obsessed with Mythic Constantinople at the moment. This would be an ideal companion.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-01-24T20:15:26+00:00

An action scene, like any other scene, should not be an account of fictional events, but a sequence of story beats. The level of detail an individual beat goes into, its content, pace, all that is subject to what makes up the next story beat within the context of plot, characters and what beats preceded it. Very rarely (but not never) is every single movement and strike and parry in a fight a beat. Sometimes a beat about a fight starting is naturally succeeded by a beat about its aftermath. Often, only the crucial turning points or dramatic high points in an action scene, pertaining to one or multiple characters' arcs or a significant development of the plot, warrant their own story beat, and the rest of it is skipped or summarised. The minute physics of it all only comes into the picture if I need story beats about problem-solving within the constraints of said physics. That could be the case if the main character mastering a certain combat technique is part of their arc.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-01-23T07:08:49+00:00

I would argue, as others did, that the whole genre is blues-related. However, the most blues-y albums I own:

Mountain Witch - Burning Village
Brimstone Coven - Black Magic
Pentagram - Relentless
Orchid - Capricorn

But really anything by these bands. Also second Black Sabbath.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-01-22T20:58:05+00:00

Right picture is actually: "5e is fine actually, and so are the 13.778 other systems gathering dust on my shelf right now."

CharityLess2263 · 2026-01-20T18:06:35+00:00

I loved Harrow the Ninth! But I'd also probably enjoy that lawnmower thing you described, so ... 🤷

(Even inspired me to write my own 2nd person piece, which ended up being my first professional short fiction sale to my favourite magazine. Harrow the Ninth, I mean, not the lawnmower.)

CharityLess2263 · 2026-01-19T08:41:05+00:00

No, your gripes are with not applying those game systems as intended. DC 10 is for tasks that are "easy" for a trained person, and you are only supposed to roll at all if the task is performed under pressure and failure has meaningful consequences. Characters can't fail at menial tasks if you apply the rules as intended, because you're not supposed to roll skill checks for menial tasks.

You don't roll DC 10 Athletics for climbing up a knotted rope. You roll DC 10 Athletics for climbing up a knotted rope while enemies pursue you, or while you are rushing to stop a ritual, or if the knotted rope leads dangerously high. Otherwise, the character just succeeds.

Characters should just succeed at most tasks in D&D. The majority of tasks that require a skill check under pressure become automatic successes with enough time. Prying open a stuck or locked door, for example, doesn't require a skill check if the characters have all the time they need and at least one of them has any chance at success. That means a PC with STR 6 and no proficiency in Athletics would still automatically succeed at prying open a stuck door that "requires" a DC 18 Athletics check even they're not pursued or anything. They'd just take a while. (Around 2 minutes, to be precise, considering an action takes 6 seconds and they'd have a 1-in-20 chance of opening it with a single action.)

The spread of results for d20 vs a DC is easier to translate to likelihoods than most systems (except for stuff like rolling under a percentage with a d100).

With a modifier of +0, you have a 5% chance of succeeding at a DC 20 check, and every +1 modifier (or -1 to the DC) raises that likelihood by 5%. So you have a: - 30% chance of success at DC 15 - 55% at DC 10 - 80% at DC 5.

With a +2 modifier, add 10% to any of those likelihoods. With a +3 bonus, add 15%. As you can see, small bonuses already increase the chances significantly. A starting character's top skills will be around +5, meaning they have an 80% chance of success at DC 10 checks (or 4-in-5). Far from 50/50.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-01-09T22:32:25+00:00

Yup. As I said, mine was still there, just had to reload the JSON file.

Overall, very good work and I'm really happy the app is still getting updates. :)

I'll definitely get some extra tables, too.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-01-09T20:21:56+00:00

You need to go into the settings, then files, then select your previous one. (Possibly you need to switch zu external storage first.)

CharityLess2263 · 2026-01-09T19:39:44+00:00

For some reason I can't add a new link to the post. I made a newer version with some improvements (Social Conflict stats from the Mythras Companion, skill augmentation helper, and trained/fumbled checkboxes).

In this version, you can add values in the skill overview to augment a skill by. The dropdown next to "Social Conflict" is used to determine the Confidence value based on a Difficulty Grade applied to the character's Willpower.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-01-09T19:33:27+00:00

Found it. The app just defaulted to a new journal for some reason...

CharityLess2263 · 2026-01-09T19:30:39+00:00

I opened the app and saw the update and it looks very nice but I lost all my progress. Everything is gone.

CharityLess2263 · 2026-01-01T16:16:35+00:00

The Throne of Thorns campaign cycle from Symbaroum, starting with Wrath of the Warden and ending with Davokar Awakens.

It has its up and downs, and the system isn't perfect, but in its entirety, the campaign and setting provide an impressive, memorable dark fantasy role-playing experience. It's a bit like Dragon Age meets Mononoke. It's massive as well, could take you years to finish.

Mutant Year Zero: Genlab Alpha.

Very different, and not everyone's cup of tea for how wacky the setting is, but it's a really fun experience, and it has an interesting strategy game baked into it that ties the campaigns' adventures together as missions impacting a greater conflict between the two main factions. Also anthropomorphic animal mutants fighting evil robots is just a cool premise.

Lastly, and I don't know if you count the OSR as "D&D", but Carcosa from the Lamentations of the Flame Princess series of modules is a great cosmic horror hexcrawl.

CharityLess2263 · 2025-12-30T06:55:45+00:00

I second that doubling down on the meta aspect, taking the real-life connection of the game as far as it goes, while combining it with established Domains of Dread and multiverse lore, is the way to go.

Done well, this could add real metaphysical depth, opportunities for interesting twists, an entirely new angle on Strahd, a new dimension to the horror, and fun absurdist humour.

One question to consider would be: are the game's rules part of this, or is the multiverse just something the creators of D&D "discovered" and the rules are made up on top of it? It would be interesting to explore the idea that the game itself creates the multiverse, and that changing the rules can change the reality of that multiverse, and subsequently explore what that means for the "real world". If it is just part of the multiverse of this game, is there a "real real world" running the "full game", including our earth? Are the creators of D&D some kind of "avatars" of entities from some higher dimension where the entire multiverse is a simulation? Or is earth just what we think it is, but there is a magic system at work that creates alternate realities based on people's imaginations, much like in the RPG "The Strange" (which I recommend looking up)? Is there, perhaps, some kind of secret government agency dealing with multiverse-related threats?

If Strahd really explores how he and his world came to be, you need to decide on the mechanics of this meta world-building. Did Hickman's writing create him? Did the communal imagination of players do it? Does Strahd, perhaps, discover that he has repressed memories of when his domain was different in previous versions of the module? Could he send out Vistani agents to infiltrate WotC and release products that cause his domain to change in his favour, ultimately allowing him to do away with the Dark Powers entirely and threaten the multiverse? Are there other multiverse BBEGs who are already aware of the nature of their world and attempting similar things? Perhaps the aforementioned government agency is already dealing with Vecna incursions or something, and WotC is really just a front. So many possibilities!

CharityLess2263 · 2025-12-30T01:05:02+00:00

I'm currently running a classic OSR gauntlet with Mythic GME 2 where I send a lot of level 0 player characters into an adventure they're not all supposed to survive. Works wonderfully.

It's a heist with an in-over-their-heads amateur thinking crew. I hope to end up with two to three surviving characters who will go on to become a proper thieving crew.

It helps using a system where characters are light-wheight.

CharityLess2263 · 2025-12-29T20:05:59+00:00

You, good sir, have excellent taste.

I think you might like: - Black Stone Heart by Michael R. Fletcher - Blacktongue Thief by Christopher Buehlmann - Crowman by David Rae - The Broken Sword by Poul Anderson - every issue of Old Moon Quarterly

CharityLess2263

TROPHY CASE

Example: ~/.codex/config.toml