111–120 of 229 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've been using GLM 4.7 with Claude Code. best of both worlds. Canceled my Anthropic subscription due to the US politics as well. Already started my "withdrawal" in Jan 2025, Anthropic was one of the few that was left
I much prefer OpenCode these days, give it a try.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Chinese labs distill the SOTA models to boost the performance of theirs. They are a trailer hooked up (with a 3-6 month long chain) to the trucks pushing the technology forwards. I've yet to see a trailer overtake it's truck. China would need an architectural breakthrough to leap American labs given the huge compute disparity.
Care to explain how the volume of AI research papers authored by Chinese researchers[1] has exceeded US-published ones? Time-traveling plagiarism perhaps, since you believe the US is destined to lead always. 1. Chinese researcher in China , to be more specific.
They need a training-multiplier breakthrough that would allow them to train SOTA models on on a fraction of the compute that the US does. And this would also have to be kept a secret and be well hidden (often multiple researchers from around the world put the pieces together on a problem at around the same time, so the breakthrough would have to be something pretty difficult to discover for the greatest minds in the field) to prevent the US from using it to multiply their model strength with their greater compute.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you tried the new GLM 4.7?
I've been using GLM 4.7 alongside Opus 4.5 and I can't believe how bad it is. Seriously. I spent 20 minutes yesterday trying to get GLM 4.7 to understand that a simple modal on a web page (vanilla JS and HTML!) wasn't displaying when a certain button was clicked. I hooked it up to Chrome MCP in Open Code as well. It constantly told me that it fixed the problem. In frustration, I opened Claude Code and just typed "Why…
This has been my consistent experience with every model prior to Opus 4.5, and every single open model I've given a go.
Hopefully we will get there in another 6 months when Opus is distilled into new open models, but I've always been shocked at some of the claims around open models, when I've been entirely unable to replicate them.
Hell, even Opus 4.5 shits the bed with semi-regularity on anything that's not completely greenfield for my usage, once I'm giving it tasks beyond some unseen complexity boundary.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is terrifying. With this and z-image-turbo, we've crossed a chasm. And a very deep one. We are currently protected by screens, we can, and should assume everything behind a screen is fake unless rigorously (and systematically, i.e. cryptographically) proven otherwise. We're sleepwalking into this, not enough people know about it.
Admittedly I have not dove into it much but, I wonder if we might finally have a usecase for NFTs and web3? We need some sort of way to denote items are persion generated not AI. Would certainly be easier than trying to determine if something is AI generated
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People that couldn't sing will make music. I was with you, until But, yeah. Life will go on.
There are plenty of electronic artists who can't sing. Right now they have to hire someone else to do the singing for them, but I'd wager a lot of them would like to own their music end-to-end. I would. I'm a filmmaker. I've done it photons-on-glass production for fifteen years. Meisner trained, have performed every role from cast to crew. I'm elated that these tools are going to enable me to do more with a smaller b…
Oh no.
Maybe we did frig this up.
If you want to try out the voice cloning yourself you can do that an this Hugging Face demo: https://huggingface.co/spaces/Qwen/Qwen3-TTS - switch to the "Voice Clone" tab, paste in some example text and use the microphone option to record yourself reading that text - then paste in other text and have it generate a version of that read using your voice. I shared a recording of audio I generated with that here: https:…
This is terrifying. With this and z-image-turbo, we've crossed a chasm. And a very deep one. We are currently protected by screens, we can, and should assume everything behind a screen is fake unless rigorously (and systematically, i.e. cryptographically) proven otherwise. We're sleepwalking into this, not enough people know about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is terrifying. With this and z-image-turbo, we've crossed a chasm. And a very deep one. We are currently protected by screens, we can, and should assume everything behind a screen is fake unless rigorously (and systematically, i.e. cryptographically) proven otherwise. We're sleepwalking into this, not enough people know about it.
That was my thought too. You’d have “loved ones” calling with their faces and voices asking for money in some emergency. But you’d also have plausible deniability as anything digital can be brushed off as “that’s not evidence, it could be AI generated”.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Perhaps you should pay attention to where the puck is going to be, rather than where it is currently. Lots of original ideas are coming out of Chinese AI research[1], denying this betrays some level of cope. 1. e.g. select any DeepSeek release, and read the accompanying paper
I'll pay attention to where the puck is because that is something I can observe, where it is going to be is anybody's guess. Lots of original ideas are coming out of Chinese AI research but there is also lots of junk. I think in the longer term they will have the advantage but right now that simply isn't the case. Your 'cope' accusation has no place here, I have no dog in the race and do not need to cope with anythin…
I will rephrase my statement and continue to stand by it: "Denying the volume of original AI research being done by China - a falsifiable metric - betrays some level of cope."
You seem to agree on the fact that China has surpassed the US. As for quality, I'll say expertise is a result of execution. At some point in time during off-shoring, the US had qualitatively better machinists that China, despite manufacturing volumes. That is no longer the case today - as they say, cream floats to the top, and that holds true for a pot or an industrial-sized vat.