News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Codex for Open Source by EduardoBautista on Saturday June 13, 2026 @08:01PM (#48522741)
Which online product gives away 6 months of a $100 per month subscription?
Re:Codex for Open Source by throwitaway222 on Saturday June 13, 2026 @08:10PM (#48522804)
That's what I was thinking, but the downvoters are hunting today.
Re:Codex for Open Source by wodenokoto on Saturday June 13, 2026 @08:27PM (#48522939)
6 email addresses gives you 6 one months trials …
Re:Codex for Open Source by gruez on Saturday June 13, 2026 @11:25PM (#48523895)
Since when did they have trials?
Re:Codex for Open Source by wodenokoto on Sunday June 14, 2026 @12:00AM (#48524054)
I’m running on my 3rd codex trial and have had a month of Gemini Pro. I think Claude is the only one without trials.
Re:Codex for Open Source by tclancy on Saturday June 13, 2026 @09:10PM (#48523200)
Where am I going to find [email protected]?
Re:Codex for Open Source by manquer on Saturday June 13, 2026 @09:52PM (#48523415)
Using a plus sign is subaddressing [1] and most ESPs[2] will route to the main address ( [email protected]) . So you can use use [email protected], [email protected] and both will route the email to you.

In my experience most SaaS apps do not filter this out and allow re-sign ups with sub-addresses.

Gmail has an additional behavior that dot character is ignored in local component of the address . [email protected], [email protected] [email protected] all route to the same inbox as well.

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5233 [2] Less common in work hosted ESPs but almost universally default enabled in public ESPs for consumers.

Re:Codex for Open Source by dhshhshsj on Sunday June 14, 2026 @02:19AM (#48524668)
This is not true (anymore?). I have a rather unfortunate exact naming collision with a family member. They use the full name without dot for the local gmail component, I use a dot between the first and last name.

Two or three mails have been misplaced in a decade.

Re:Codex for Open Source by manquer on Sunday June 14, 2026 @02:30AM (#48524716)
It is still the rules for Gmail (https://support.google.com/mail/answer/7436150?hl=en).

It would be feasible to change something like that without breaking security now.

Google can hardly start allowing/routing a new account for [email protected] when you were getting it for years even though your account is [email protected] and sensitive communication like say from your bank would routed there.

Re:Codex for Open Source by maybe_pablo on Saturday June 13, 2026 @11:32PM (#48523927)
icloud+ hide my email for $0.99
Re:Codex for Open Source by Groxx on Saturday June 13, 2026 @09:13PM (#48523216)
One can consult the oracle, /dev/random
Re:Codex for Open Source by Supermancho on Saturday June 13, 2026 @10:57PM (#48523763)
you need a non-voip phone number for codex SMS now, as well.
Re:Codex for Open Source by testfrequency on Sunday June 14, 2026 @04:02AM (#48525174)
This. I tried even tried signing up with my paid business line and it denied me due to VoIP.
Re:Codex for Open Source by yencabulator on Monday June 15, 2026 @09:54PM (#48549578)
> OpenAI may reject, suspend, or revoke any Program benefit for any reason in its sole discretion, including without limitation if it reasonably believes that an applicant or recipient: [...] (ii) used multiple identities or accounts to obtain more than one benefit
Re:Codex for Open Source by HatchedLake721 on Saturday June 13, 2026 @08:28PM (#48522944)
Every 2nd SaaS with a startup plan? I used intercom/customer.io/segment/amplitude/mixpanel for free for a year.
Re:Codex for Open Source by pastel8739 on Sunday June 14, 2026 @01:12AM (#48524388)
The marginal cost of all of those is definitely much lower than for Codex, though
Re:Codex for Open Source by runlevel1 on Saturday June 13, 2026 @09:42PM (#48523371)
The price might be more commoditized if OpenAI kept true to the original mission that lives on, albeit vestigially, in their name.
Re:Codex for Open Source by zzyxy on Sunday June 14, 2026 @02:39AM (#48524764)
Make it $200/month subscription which actually gives you access to O($1K) worth of codex compute. Even at the face value it is very generous, IMO.
Re:Codex for Open Source by olzhasar on Sunday June 14, 2026 @02:57AM (#48524838)
An online product that was brought into existence by processing all the open source software in the world and makes money by selling the resulting knowledge base, should be accessible free of charge by the producers of that open source software.
Re:Codex for Open Source by mqus on Sunday June 14, 2026 @05:43AM (#48525674)
Jetbrains gives away for free infinity years of a $180+ per year subscription (its more expensive in the first year or for orgs)[1] for open source authors, students, and more. Sure, the per-month price tag is not as high but after year 4 you saved much more.

[1] https://www.jetbrains.com/store/?section=students&billing=ye...

Re:Codex for Open Source by Gigachad on Sunday June 14, 2026 @05:47AM (#48525696)
Though it doesn't cost them anything of note to provide this other than maybe some lost sales to devs who would have bought it.
Re:Codex for Open Source by LoganDark on Sunday June 14, 2026 @07:17AM (#48526164)
After using JetBrains IDEs for years I can hardly really get into anything that isn't vertically integrated. Language servers are THE WORST -- I love Zed but only use it for things that don't require language integration at all.

It's like how after using Apple hardware for years I couldn't put up with most Windows laptops -- either they were HiDPI ultrabooks with no performance or they were sloppy gamer machines with no class.

Learning JetBrains gets you hooked.