Twitter/X

@cramforce (2026-05-09) calls @a16z's analysis "BS" because it omits all Codex…

2026-05-09 · 19:36 UTC ·@cramforce ·0 min read

Brief

@cramforce criticizes @a16z (2026-05-09) for publishing misleading analytics that omit all Codex downloads and ignore Claude's preferred download path, arguing npm download counts are skewed by RL-initiated bursts that produce large spikes. He recommends major trainers adopt an npm proxy to reduce noise and reiterates "Codex is awesome."

Why it matters

@cramforce (2026-05-09) calls @a16z's analysis "BS" because it omits all Codex downloads and does not include the preferred Claude download path

Key details

npm download counts are unreliable according to @cramforce: they undergo extreme fluctuations, including RL-initiated bursts that can create very significant spikes and distort metrics
@cramforce urges major model trainers to use an npm proxy to reduce these distortions, says he regularly monitors this data, and adds "Codex is awesome"

Source evidence

When this was originally posted as click bait that was OK. That is how the internet works. But @a16z?

Why is this BS:
- It does not cover all codex downloads
- It does not cover the preferred claude download path
- npm downloads are subject to extreme fluctuations and these days this includes RL-initiated pops in download counts that can be very significant

The RL-burst are actually very annoying cause I will admit that I look at this data a lot and it used to be useful with a few caveats. I wish the major trainers would use an npm proxy.

PS: Codex is awesome