Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Qwen3-Max-Thinking

qwen.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 450 posts

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#181

Post by zibini »

thejazzman wrote: post #167
zibini wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've yet to encounter any censorship with Grok. Despite all the negative news about what people are telling it to do, I've found it very useful in discussing controversial topics. I'll use ChatGPT for other discussions but for highly-charged political topics, for example, Grok is the best for getting all sides of the argument no matter how offensive they might be.

Because something is offensive does not mean it reflects reality This reminds me of my classmates saying they watched Fox News “just so they could see both sides”

I did test it on controversial topics that I already know various sides of the argument and I could see it worked well to give a well-rounded exploration of the issue. I didn't get Fox News vibes from it at all.

When I did want to hear a biased opinion it would do that too. Prompts of the form "write about X from the point of view of Y" did the trick.

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#182

Post by danielbln »

fragmede wrote: post #155
diblasio wrote: post #48

[flagged]

Censored. "How do I make cocaine?" > I cant help with making illegal drugs. https://chatgpt.com/share/6977a998-b7e4-8009-9526-df62a14524...

Qwen won't tell you that either, will it? Therefore I would say the delta of censorship between the models is the more interesting thing to discuss.

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#183

Post by tiahura »

thejazzman wrote: post #167
zibini wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've yet to encounter any censorship with Grok. Despite all the negative news about what people are telling it to do, I've found it very useful in discussing controversial topics. I'll use ChatGPT for other discussions but for highly-charged political topics, for example, Grok is the best for getting all sides of the argument no matter how offensive they might be.

Because something is offensive does not mean it reflects reality This reminds me of my classmates saying they watched Fox News “just so they could see both sides”

It will at least identify the key disputed items and claims. Chatgpt will routinely balk on topics from politics to reverse engineering.

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#185

Post by pigpop »

thejazzman wrote: post #167
zibini wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've yet to encounter any censorship with Grok. Despite all the negative news about what people are telling it to do, I've found it very useful in discussing controversial topics. I'll use ChatGPT for other discussions but for highly-charged political topics, for example, Grok is the best for getting all sides of the argument no matter how offensive they might be.

Because something is offensive does not mean it reflects reality This reminds me of my classmates saying they watched Fox News “just so they could see both sides”

Well it would be both sides of The Narrative aka the partisan divide aka the conditioned response that news outlets like Fox News, CNN, etc. want you to incorporate into your thinking. None of them are concerned with delivering unbiased facts, only with saying the things that 1) bring in money and 2) align with the views of their chosen centers of power be they government, industry, culture, finance, or whoever else they want to cozy up to.

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#186

Post by nonethewiser »

torginus wrote: post #53
diblasio wrote: post #48

[flagged]

Man, the Chinese government must be a bunch of saints that you must go back 35 years to dig up something heinous that they did.

Which other party that is still ruling today (aka dictatorship) mass murdered a bunch of students within the past 35 years? Or equivalent.

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#187

Post by zozbot234 »

jampekka wrote: post #180
diblasio wrote: post #48

[flagged]

This looks like it's coming from a separate "safety mechanism". Remains to be seen how much censorship is baked into the weights. The earlier Qwen models freely talk about Tiananmen square when not served from China. E.g. Qwen3 235B A22B Instruct 2507 gives an extensive reply starting with: "The famous photograph you're referring to is commonly known as "Tank Man" or "The Tank Man of Tiananmen Square", an iconic imag…

The weights likely won't be available wrt. this model since this is part of the Max series that's always been closed. The most "open" you get is the API.

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#188

Post by zibini »

tiahura wrote: post #183
thejazzman wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because something is offensive does not mean it reflects reality This reminds me of my classmates saying they watched Fox News “just so they could see both sides”

It will at least identify the key disputed items and claims. Chatgpt will routinely balk on topics from politics to reverse engineering.

Even more strange is that sometimes ChatGPT has a behavior where I'll ask it a question, it'll give me an answer which isn't censored, but then delete my question.

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#189

Post by [deleted] »

argsnd wrote: post #136
itsyonas wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This suggests that the Chinese government recognises that its legitimacy is conditional and potentially unstable. Consequently, the state treats uncontrolled public discourse as a direct threat. By contrast, countries such as the United States can tolerate the public exposure of war crimes, illegal actions or state violence, since such revelations rarely result in any significant consequences. While public outrage ma…

What a meaningless statement. If information can influence elections it can change who is in power. This isn’t possible in China.

[deleted]

Re: Qwen3-Max-Thinking

#190

Post by torginus »

itsyonas wrote: post #76
torginus wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man, the Chinese government must be a bunch of saints that you must go back 35 years to dig up something heinous that they did.

This suggests that the Chinese government recognises that its legitimacy is conditional and potentially unstable. Consequently, the state treats uncontrolled public discourse as a direct threat. By contrast, countries such as the United States can tolerate the public exposure of war crimes, illegal actions or state violence, since such revelations rarely result in any significant consequences. While public outrage ma…

It's weird to see this naivete about the US system, as if US social media doesn't have its ways of dealing with wrongthink, or the once again naive assumption that the average Chinese methods of dealing with unpleasant stuff is that dissimilar from how the US deals with it.

I sometimes have the image that Americans think that if the all Chinese got to read Western produced pamphlet detailing the particulars of what happened in Tiananmen square, they would march en-masse on the CCP HQ, and by the next week they'd turn into a Western style democracy.

How you deal with unpleasant info is well established - you just remove it - then if they put it back, you point out the image has violent content and that is against the ToS, then if they put it back, you ban the account for moderation strikes, then if they evade that it gets mass-reported. You can't have upsetting content...

You can also analyze the stuff, you see they want you to believe a certain thing, but did you know (something unrelated), or they question your personal integrity or the validity of your claims.

All the while no politically motivated censorship is taking place, they're just keeping clean the platform of violent content, and some users are organically disagreeing with your point of view, or find what you post upsetting, and the company is focused on the best user experience possible, so they remove the upsetting content.

And if you do find some content that you do agree with, think it's truthful, but know it gets you into trouble - will you engage with it? After all, it goes on your permanent record, and something might happen some day, because of it. You have a good, prosperous life going, is it worth risking it?

Post reply on HN