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

Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

qwen.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 317 posts

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#71

Post by boomskats »

adjejmxbdjdn wrote: post #41
embedding-shape wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless US hyperscalers do the same in reverse, I hope the status quo stays as it is. Either people are happy to share, and the sharing should happen both ways, or US hyperscalers can keep isolating themselves as they've done so far.

I do hope The U.S. hyperscalers do the same as well. In an ideal world U.S. residents would use Chinese AI models and Chinese residents would use U.S. AI models. Governments in both countries are collecting data for nefarious reasons. But the Chinese government has far less influence on a U.S. resident and vice versa. We are all better off if our data is collected by a government halfway across the world instead of o…

Yeah, about that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UKUSA_Agreement#Controversy

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#72

Post by stickfigure »

eloisant wrote: post #66
giancarlostoro wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would have been the world we live in if China wasn't involved in so much corporate espionage. I don't even feel comfortable using their open weight models on anything my employer makes, the only time I use Qwen is for greenfield "how good is this?" type of projects, but otherwise, how do I trust that it wont mysteriously hallucinate phoning home? On the other hand, there's other models where the source is 100% ope…

I agree, but the same goes for the US. Remember Echelon.

It's highly improbable that the US government has a secret team inside Anthropic and OpenAI manipulating their training regimen. For better or worse, these companies are filled with ideologues and something that invasive would trigger an army of whistleblowers (despite legal consequences).

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#73

Post by vibe42 »

bsenftner wrote: post #9

Any reports from people using their coding agent(s)?

I'm using the pi-mono coding agent (open source, free) without any extensions and very simple prompts. The 3.6 27B model (BF16, 250k context) uses 67GB VRAM on an RTX PRO 9000.

It's very capable on almost any coding task I've thrown at it, and very good for easy-to-medium hard scripts, new code bases.

It struggles on some complex tasks in larger code bases, e.g. using to debug and fix bugs in llama.cpp it gets close to working code but often introduces errors. For such tasks its still very useful as a search/explore tool and drafting fixes.

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#74

Post by hypercube33 »

beydogan wrote: post #38
goyozi wrote: post #2

These are very good numbers. I still don’t get why they don’t compare against latest competitor versions in these posts, it’s not like we’re all not going to notice.

honestly, initial version of Opus-4.6 was much better than whatever we are being served right now as 4.7. If it performs same level to that, i'm totally willing to switch.

4.6 was an awful experience the month I used it right after launch where it didn't ask anything just made assumptions and went on its merry way. 4.5 and 4.7 don't do that for me but 4.7 eats my quota for breakfast so I've been avoiding using it because I like to have it for more than an hour a day.

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#76

Post by gmerc »

stickfigure wrote: post #72
eloisant wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree, but the same goes for the US. Remember Echelon.

It's highly improbable that the US government has a secret team inside Anthropic and OpenAI manipulating their training regimen. For better or worse, these companies are filled with ideologues and something that invasive would trigger an army of whistleblowers (despite legal consequences).

Its very hard to be so naive.

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#77

Post by dpoloncsak »

0xbadcafebee wrote: post #56
tekacs wrote: post #25

As they start to release more proprietary models, I so wish that they partnered with one of the major US hyperscalers to allow using these models through something US-domiciled. Totally understand why it may not be reasonable or in their best interest (and that the US is _absolutely_ not doing the same reflexively). But it would be lovely to be able to try these out on production workloads in earnest.

I'm more interested in hearing specific reasons why one wouldn't use a Chinese company. Unless you're thinking Alibaba is going to ship chat logs to some government ministry that will then dole out proprietary information to new competitors (which doesn't seem logistically feasible), or you run a human rights organization, it feels a bit like FUD.

Because my CEO thinks China scary big hacker guys over there

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#79

Post by polski-g »

Mashimo wrote: post #36
dfansteel wrote: post #28

Can anyone check its knowledge base for me? I’m honestly not able to run it and the Qwen models I can run censor information critical towards the Chinese government. Tiananmen Square is the first place to start.

> I’m honestly not able to run it What do you mean? This is not self hosted, it's closed source. And any website that targets China or is hosted in China will probably censor Tiananmen Square.

There is no reason why they couldn't license the model to Friendli/Fireworks/etc and have it hosted in the US to alleviate this concern.

Re: Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

#80

Post by saghm »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #55
nickdothutton wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is much more interested in waging a campaign against companies that represent the material of the future growth in productivity, exports, and prosperity of the US and her people, than learning about you as an individual. Unless of course you are a Chinese dissident living in the US.

Which is basically the current primary use for AI is programming more than anything, you hear about AI in programming more than in any other field.

There are also a lot more novels about writing than making movies and a lot more songs about music than plays. It's not clear that this is because it's actually the primary use-case or if it's just because people who work with computers will inevitably talk quite a lot about computer things. For the past several years, pretty much everyone I meet who isn't in software but find out I do (doctors, people who sit next to me on a plane, etc.) will ask me my thoughts about AI because it's so widely discussed in general, and they're curious about my perspective on it as someone in software, but most of the time they're most curious about understanding more about how it might affect their own lives, not mine.
Post reply on HN