Remix.run Logo
artdigital 4 hours ago

That’s very clearly a no, I don’t understand why so many people think this is unclear.

You can’t use Claude OAuth tokens for anything. Any solution that exists worked because it pretended/spoofed to be Claude Code. Same for Gemini (Gemini CLI, Antigravity)

Codex is the only one that got official blessing to be used in OpenClaw and OpenCode, and even that was against the ToS before they changed their stance on it.

adastra22 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Is Codex ok with any other third party applications, or just those?

prodigycorp an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Yes. You can build third party applications on top of codex app server. All open source. https://developers.openai.com/codex/app-server/

artdigital 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

By default, assume no. The lack of any official integration guide should be a clear sign. Even saying that you reverse-engineer Codex for apps to pretend to be Codex makes it clear that this is not an officially endorsed thing to do

turblety an hour ago | parent [-]

Codex is Open Source though, so I wonder at what stage me adding features to Codex is different from me starting a new project and using the subscription.

But I believe OpenAI does let you use their subscription in third parties, so not an issue anyway.

theLiminator 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Interested to know this too

croes 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

But why does it matter which program consumes the tokens?

kgwgk an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Why does it matter to the free buffet manager where do you consume the food? We may never know.

blackoil 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They'll own entire pipeline interface, conduit, backend. Interface is what people get habitual to. If I am a regular user of Claude Code, I may not shift to competitor for 10-20% gains in cost.

esafak 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They must be getting something out of it, because we sure aren't.

gardnr 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Cory Doctorow has a word for this..

esafak 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

They think their position is strong enough to lock users in. I'm not so sure.

whatsupdog 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's enshittification - for those who didn't know.

xigoi 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They want that sweet vendor lock-in.

KingMob 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Presumably because their flat rate pricing is based off their ability to manage token use via their first-party tools.

A third-party tool may be less efficient in saving costs (I have heard many of them don't hit Anthropic LLMs' caches as well).

Would you be willing to pay more for your plan, to subsidize the use of third-party tools by others?

---

Note, afaik, Anthropic hasn't come out and said this is the reason, but it fits.

Or, it could also just be that the LLM companies view their agent tools as the real moat, since the models themselves aren't.

DrammBA an hour ago | parent [-]

But wouldn't a less efficient tool simply consume your 5-hour/weekly quota faster? There's gotta be something else, probably telemetry, maybe hoping people switch to API without fighting, or simply vendor lock-in.