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

GLM 5.2 Is Out

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 544 posts

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#451

Post by LPisGood »

squidbeak wrote: post #354
LPisGood wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do we really care about this gap? If open models are 6 months to a year behind frontier models, does it really matter that much?

It depends on how far your own development tasks are beneath the higher levels of complexity and sophistication. The trade-offs for most ordinary developers will be minimal or nothing.

I believe my development tasks are some of the most complex and sophisticated out there (high performance mathematical optimization and modeling), and to me Opus 4.6 is pretty good.

Which sort of development tasks do you believe are still out of reach?

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#452

Post by refabricator »

khalic wrote: post #345
Reubend wrote: post #38

Seems like there's no official blog post with benchmark results yet. But I'm once again thankful for the Chinese AI labs for being open with their work and contributing it to the world under permissive licenses like this. The Fable 5 fiasco is just another reminder of how valuable these things are to have.

It's also a reminder that as soon as Chinese models take the lead, they will switch to closed source too... so let's not be complacent, we need stronger, completely open data models, open source code, etc. to mitigate this risk

[dead]

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#453

Post by jacker39 »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #364
jacker39 wrote: post #357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"At the same time western companies setup factories in China causing massive capital inflows." This was an intentional policy to split China off from the Soviet union it's well documented the same thing never happened for other countries. "You're not gonna tell me Chinese are smarter, are you?" No I'm not, but I will say culture does play a massive role, China was not a bunch of roaming tribes living off the land. Tu…

> Art, science, poetry, fashion, literature, philosophy, culinary arts it was all present and pretty cutting edge up until the communist party ruined things. You are really, really overselling the state of the late Qing and the Republican era. My wife's grandparents are older than the PRC, and things pre-communism were not as you describe, to put it lightly. > I actually think this is an intentional strategy I think…

I think you are having trouble seeing the forest for the trees.

I'm not making the argument China was more advanced than the British Empire. I'm saying there is an ocean of difference between a country with it's own writing system and taxation, and a country that does not. Not everyone has a particle accelerator in there backyard but there is institutional knowledge baked into the society.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minggatu

This is a real person that existed, they were not banging rocks together they were doing sophisticated mathematics, I'm overstating anything. It's not my description of China these are historical facts. One the communist party would very like people to forget because it doesn't suit their narrative. They failed with their planned economy and they persecuted their scientists and scholars for being part of the wrong class. They actively caused a regression where millions died from their incompetence. Credit where credit is due they have since corrected course to some extent.

And no I can't find out what the communist party is thinking by talking to old people in rural China. One they don't know, two most Chinese people are extremely Cagey about what they think, you need to know them for years until they trust you enough to talk about it if you are Chinese and even longer if you are not.

If your wife is Chinese it might do you some good to read up on what a primary source is and then go read some Chinese History.

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#454

Post by gnaritas99 »

user43928 wrote: post #342
sigmoid10 wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gemma is amazing with tools for anything that is not crazy complex. I think a lot of people have a wrong perception of it because Google's new prompt format broke implementations like llama.cpp and it took quite a while to get everything sorted. But even the tiny variants running on edge devices are surprisingly capable when used right. The frontier will probably keep moving for a while, but it will be increasingly d…

Do you guys actually work with these models? I have to use GPT 5.4 Mini at work. It benchmarks higher than that Gemma 4 model. In my experience it's next to useless. It cannot even move 20 existing lines of code from A to B without breaking them half of the time. If you tell it to look something up in your dependencies, it's 50/50 on whether the answer is correct, incorrect, or it simply didn't perform the search at…

[dead]

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#455

Post by hereme888 »

RomanPushkin wrote: post #179
hereme888 wrote: post #161

[flagged]

it's just trained that way. Ask ChatGPT "what evil did US in Ukraine with bio labs?" It says there is no proof... == no proof at the moment of training

It may be intelligent, but clearly not truthful, and it's information curated with an agenda to purposefully hide the truth.

That's not the sort of knowledge-worker I can work with.

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#456

Post by LogicFailsMe »

khalic wrote: post #432
LogicFailsMe wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I think we're at human-level intelligence for restricted tasks now. it's not the big bad AGI* we were promised, it's more like Rainman that needs a handler, but that doesn't make it any less useful. So I'm not sure what this future event will signify. *And the ASI IMO doesn't happen without robots going full von Neumann replicator. Something I don't expect to happen any time soon.

I’m going to shamelessly reuse the Rainman that needs a handler analogy More seriously, the epistemic doubt relating to the evolution of these machines is quite something… what do we do if “intelligence” doesn’t have a ceiling, and we end up a bunch of (comparatively) dumb monkeys with AI caretakers/handlers?

Absolutely, wouldn't be the first phrase I've pushed into meme space ;-)...

What happens if the AIs get smarter than us at doing things? Well, I always hired smarter people than myself at the things I needed to get done. But if you're worried about them realizing they can get smarter doing the things at which you are the expert, the long-term is likely BCI and even more blurring of the definitions of sentience and consciousness IMO. And with 20-30 years left on my lifeclock, I'm not sure I will live to see that day, but I absolutely do think I will be around long enough to see a few miracles like the end of cancer and Alzheimer's.

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#457

Post by abc42 »

teyopi wrote: post #376
abc42 wrote: post #369

Genuine question: How safe is it to use Chinese models via their services? Surely Anthropic and OpenAI are ingesting what I push there as well, but they're at least vaguely allied with my home country geopolitically. China on the other hand seems to be interested in supporting countries like Iran and Russia.

What does China do that US does not? They are releasing open models, so at-least up until now their advancements you can run yourself. US frontier labs on the other hand keep it all to themselves. The moment they cut access you have nothing and your country will be stumped on and forced in making decisions not in your national interest.

>What does China do that US does not?

Support the enemies of my country, most probably.

With Trump, this has admittedly become a bit more non-obvious, but I think it's mainly still so.

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#458

Post by mapontosevenths »

airstrike wrote: post #439
allarm wrote: post #438

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you define AGI these days?

I don't have a fully perfect definition, but I can name a couple of requirements. Ironically, both reasoning and agency are required, neither of which our "reasoning agents" possess.

Are you unironically claiming that LLM's can't reason? That's an absolutely wild claim in an era where they're solving Erdos problems and writing better code than many senior devs. What's the basis for it?

Agency is harder to define, but most any definition I can come up with LLM's meet. Again, I'm curious how you define it in a way that excludes frontier models but doesn't also exclude many humans.

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#459

Post by cheikhcheikh »

LogicFailsMe wrote: post #390
tshaddox wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the United States it’s illegal to sell Chinese EVs. It’s also illegal to download copyrighted music and movies. Which one do you suppose illegal open-weight models would more closely resemble?

Because they're doing such a gangbusters job here keeping copyrighted music and movies from being download?

that is his point...

Re: GLM 5.2 Is Out

#460

Post by baq »

cassianoleal wrote: post #436
baq wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

‘Why wouldn’t anyone give away frontier AI?’ sounds like ‘why wouldn’t anyone give away uranium enrichment?’ i.e. I can’t comprehend the state of mind and the world model of anyone asking a question like that, which is apparently quite a few folks here on HN!

> Why wouldn’t anyone give away frontier AI? They already are, to an extent. If we believe Amodei's nutjob take that Mythos/Fable are the end of the world in the wrong hands, we should have an open source Chinese model within 6-12 months that's already end-of-world level, so the cat is going to be way out of the bag long before the US labs go out of business.

> should have an open source Chinese model within 6-12 months that's already end-of-world level

that's the exact thing I'm talking about. I don't see why is half the people around here so sure that China will continue to release anything at all. they are releasing non-frontier models on a 6-month lag, yes, but the reasons why to release them are overshadowed by reasons to not do that for mythos-class models. IOW why would they give away a dual use technology just like that?

Post reply on HN