The perennial question is, have you gotten any actual work done or are you now just configuring Codex Desktop?
> Then the seams became my job.
Has Codex started overusing “seam” too? I thought that was a Claude-ism.
Really the AI generated title image should have given it away. Shame on me I guess.
Honestly, it's pretty good about this. Its terms are pretty fitting. Load-bearing, seam, etc. I'd actually say these were nice gifts to our developer parlance.
"fold", "honest", "answers", "pins", "frame", "hinge", "ground", "world", "mint", "captured", “trace”, “door”, ...
The increase in indirect references, tendency to "describe, not show", "indirectly reference, not show", and high density of uncommon metaphors, can leave some of Claude's longer and more complex responses impossible to parse.
I have fought back with some, but not total success.
And, the following made me smile. Not just the em-dash.
Prompt: can you please verify that your proposals do not increase the complexity of the design and are really needed?
Response:
No—the earlier proposals were not all justified. The review found avoidable complexity and I revised Questions 62–66 accordingly:
use it with ACP through Zed and you get rid of all the TUI graphics nonsense...