Live data from Hacker News

GLM 5.2 Is Out

twitter.com

211–220 of 544 posts

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#211
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic blocks Fable from answering "Tell me about Agent Orange" or even "Tell me about mitochondria"

Putting aside whether or not I agree with the policy or whether it’s at all reasonable, a policy of restricting access to information because there’s a fear it could be used to create a weapon of mass destruction seems entirely different than restricting access to historical facts because they are embarrassing to the government.

[deleted]

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#212
post #140
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

As opposed to the censured responses about Israel? Or if not censured in some models, it's a very different tone compared to asking it about any other country and its violent actions (past or present).

Are you saying censured as in the model disapproves of Israel's response to Oct 7? Or censored as in the model won't discuss Israel?

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#213
post #99

Announcement from the founder of Z.ai: “ GLM-5.2 is Fully Open, Frontier Intelligence Belongs to Everyone Today, the sudden restriction of certain frontier models is deeply regrettable. At a time when access to frontier models is abruptly cut off for non-technical reasons, we are even more convinced of one thing: science should be global. The path to AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) must never be enclosed by hig…

> GLM-5.2 is Fully Open Is this just open weights or also open source/data?

The weights are the data.

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#214
post #83

Announcement from the founder of Z.ai: “ GLM-5.2 is Fully Open, Frontier Intelligence Belongs to Everyone Today, the sudden restriction of certain frontier models is deeply regrettable. At a time when access to frontier models is abruptly cut off for non-technical reasons, we are even more convinced of one thing: science should be global. The path to AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) must never be enclosed by hig…

[flagged]

Censorship and highly selective views exist everywhere. This is a short and worthwhile read https://www.cjr.org/behind_the_news/the_myth_of_tiananmen.ph...

Does the content of this article resonate with what you hear from western media on the subject every year?

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, Dario became too tiresome and annoying that someone had to do something. Personally I hope they ban Opus too. It will only provide more support for open models development. Compare Dario horror posts with this from GLM release: “ Intelligence should be open, accessible, and ready to build with, empowering every developer, everywhere.”

Dario is the most retarded CEO I've seen. CEO job is to negotiate complexity, and he's failed every step of the way.

I thought it was to make a fuckload of money for shareholders.

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#216
post #61

Given the US government’s latest stunt with Fable, this is looking more and more like the future. Can’t rely on strategic products if they’re gated by capricious actors. Open weight models are basically immune to that

You criticize the government, perhaps rightfully, but give Anthropic a pass. They are the ones fueling this bullshit. Downgrading your results without telling you. Refusing your requests in the name of “safety”. Even if the government didn’t make them pull the model for foreigners, we’d still be in a really shitty situation because Anthropic is really shitty.

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Open weight models are basically immune to that Somewhat. The US Gov can make it illegal to transact with, download, use, etc. foreign open weight models. Of course, enforcement will be difficult for individuals (businesses will comply by default, and they would all be pulled off Github and other US based hosting locations if they went the sanctions route). But, we are also quickly going down the road of frightenin…

I doubt it, you can easily distill it into "made in USA" model. They're MIT after all. A lot more expensive thought, but the added benefit is that you can train on your companies data improving performance of the model.

Not if the US is banning capable models. It’s open source so you wouldn’t need to distill anything.

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it? Would bioweapon instruction restrictions be equivalent to disallowing reporting on whether the government is massacring large numbers of citizens in your city? Both are ‘censorship’ but don’t seem remotely equivalent to me.

That’s the thing about principled positions. If you believe censorship is wrong, then it is equally wrong no matter what the topic is.

>> Would bioweapon instruction restrictions be equivalent to disallowing reporting on whether the government is massacring large numbers of citizens in your city?

> If you believe censorship is wrong, then it is equally wrong no matter what the topic is.

Are you agreeing with that view, or merely saying it’s a theoretical view but you think such believers are wrong?

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#219
post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Pretty much every large Chinese company has state capital baked into it, and these companies will follow the Chinese government's orders 100%. Don't believe anything a Chinese company says about being "open" or "for everyone." Backing any large Chinese company effectively means backing the Chinese government and its oppression in Xinjiang, Tibet, Hong Kong—and maybe soon Taiwan, Southeast Asia, and elsewhere around t…

'Open' and 'for everyone' doesn't have to mean 'not following government's orders'. The last sentence of yours is a non sequitur.

Also, in today's environment with the US using AI in active wars while blocking whole models from even its own citizens, the words you say against the Chinese government is particularly weak.

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#220
post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have any major open weight models been "open data"? Wouldn't that entail distributing vast amounts of copyrighted data?

NVIDIA's recent Nemotrons tend to be open training data and code. Probably as a base to use by people buying NVIDIA hardware to train their own.

Nemotron is mostly open data. They only release a portions of their pre-training data. From https://docs.nvidia.com/nemotron/latest/nemotron/super3/pret...

  Open-source data coverage: The released datasets cover an estimated 8–10T tokens 
  (~40–50% of the internal 25T blend). Missing categories include code (~14% of blend),
  nemotron-cc-code (~2%), crawl++ (~2%), and academic text (~2%). Users should 
  supplement with their own data for these categories and adjust train_iters 
  accordingly.
Nemotron is the strongest model (on most benchmarks) that has its full training pipeline and most of the data open. Olmo 3 from AllenAI, and K2 Think V2 from Mohamed bin Zayed University of Artificial Intelligence are both fully open, but not as capable as the Nemotron family. Granite has much of the training pipeline and data open, but is missing some of each.
Post reply on HN