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

GLM-5.2 is a step change for open agents

interconnects.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 240 posts

Re: GLM-5.2 is a step change for open agents

#31

Post by gandreani »

timcobb wrote: post #21

Can people share their GLM and open model setups in general please? What provider do you use. Why do you trust it with serving full quality? What harness do you use? Why do you trust it not to have malware (most harnessed are TS apps). I am just trying GLM 5.1 from Nvidia build in open code would love to hear how you all do it, thanks.

I use both the openai subscription and the opencode go subscription. I use the go subscription for my personal work and the openai subscription for my consulting work.

The differences between the models are minimal, but I usually stick with gpt-5.4-mini, gpt-5.4, mimo-pro-2.5, deepseek-v4-pro. These latter ones have way more usage than even using 5.4-mini so I tend to use them in personal projects for that reason.

My harness is https://github.com/can1357/oh-my-pi. I trust it...enough. It updates very frequently so as a safe guard I run it sandboxed with https://github.com/containers/bubblewrap so it can only access the project folder and some whitelisted config files

Re: GLM-5.2 is a step change for open agents

#32

Post by Fr0styMatt88 »

jerojero wrote: post #3

Open weight models from Chinese labs tend to be significantly cheaper. I think theyre absolutely needed. I can't afford 200 USD a month for personal use of coding AI, and I don't think such prices are reasonable for most of the world economy anyway. Not to mention US firms might be giving their employees a lot more than that. It's increasingly feeling, to me, that theres a gap building up between haves and have nots.…

If we can agree that the AI model is at least as capable as a junior engineer or new contractor, how’s that different to saying “software engineering isn’t worth $200 a month”?

Has a very race-to-the-bottom feel to it.

Though in the grand scheme of it, $200/mo probably isn’t the real price either. Also looking at it not just in a vacuum - paying for a product that can change what you get from under you doesn’t seem great anyway.

At least with a locally-hosted model you know what you’re getting.

Re: GLM-5.2 is a step change for open agents

#33

Post by wuhhh »

rainmaking wrote: post #25
wuhhh wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your post made me laugh because I experienced the same as you but the other way around. I switched from Claude to a multi model harness a couple of days ago and the first model I tried was GLM5.2. I gave it some simple code porting exercises and watched dumbfounded at the reasoning, which was more like the ravings of a lunatic - but lo and behold, after much confusion and a dizzying number of eureka moments the task…

Yeah isn't that thinking weird? Now I see the issue clearly! But wait... now I have the full picture! But wait... Found it! I gave up a few times because of it at first until I realized I just had to let GLM get on with it and what came out was great! But once it was outright endearing- challenging bug, it said: I have been very thorough. Then it escalated where to look and aced it. Built in confucian values

If there’s one thing I’ve learned these past couple of days, it’s to resist the temptation to jab the escape button and start waving my arms! I wonder how much of this cyclical self doubt / self congratulating I go through in my own thoughts without even realising it. If you could verbalise or articulate all the half thoughts, snatches of ideas, feelings and ruminations the human mind goes through on some tasks it might be even more bizarre (or could just be me)

Re: GLM-5.2 is a step change for open agents

#35

Post by timcobb »

gandreani wrote: post #31
timcobb wrote: post #21

Can people share their GLM and open model setups in general please? What provider do you use. Why do you trust it with serving full quality? What harness do you use? Why do you trust it not to have malware (most harnessed are TS apps). I am just trying GLM 5.1 from Nvidia build in open code would love to hear how you all do it, thanks.

I use both the openai subscription and the opencode go subscription. I use the go subscription for my personal work and the openai subscription for my consulting work. The differences between the models are minimal, but I usually stick with gpt-5.4-mini, gpt-5.4, mimo-pro-2.5, deepseek-v4-pro. These latter ones have way more usage than even using 5.4-mini so I tend to use them in personal projects for that reason. My…

Thanks. I was looking at open code go yesterday and I couldn't figure out if the base pricing is including usage or if that's just base pricing and then you have to pay for usage too. How does it work? It is very cheap.

Re: GLM-5.2 is a step change for open agents

#36

Post by rainmaking »

citizenpaul wrote: post #15

Ive been using glm5 since its release and still prefer it to glm5.1 and so far to glm5.2 Perhaps it is just my harness and workflow, but the older model still seems to work better. Also the token cost is significantly lower. I rarely spend more than $20 a week with $50 cap. Not even half claudes ambiguous minimum $200 a month plan.

Now that's a tremendous pointer, I'm going to have to try that.

Do you full on let GLM5 get stuff done on its own or is it more like a guided workflow? The former's what the point releases doubled down on and is also something that uses a lot of juice.

Re: GLM-5.2 is a step change for open agents

#37

Post by ImaCake »

praveer13 wrote: post #10
tacomagick wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DeepSeek through their own API has saved me tons of tokens honestly. Even though it is not as smart as Kimi or Claude, their level of entry is very low with a top up of 2$ and Pay as you go compared to the subscription of Claude or 20$ top up of Kimi

For personal use I’m considering using the frontier models from openai or anthropic to create a plan with research and brainstorming etc with enough details for cheap models to be able to follow (glm, deepseek etc) - with openrouter - will monitor how cheap and effective that turns out to be.

You should try out the cheaper models first. I find Deepseek v4 models pretty comparable to sonnet 4.6 but at a fraction of the cost. You might find you just don't need to use the American models at all.

Re: GLM-5.2 is a step change for open agents

#38

Post by osti »

aunty_helen wrote: post #22

I signed up to a z.ai max account, $144. Hardly been able to use it as it 429s on most requests. They’re also refusing to refund me.

Even as a GLM z.ai fan, I wouldn't pay for their plans. They are just way worse values than gpt or anthropic plans, in terms of both usage and capabilities.

Re: GLM-5.2 is a step change for open agents

#39

Post by ImaCake »

jerojero wrote: post #3

Open weight models from Chinese labs tend to be significantly cheaper. I think theyre absolutely needed. I can't afford 200 USD a month for personal use of coding AI, and I don't think such prices are reasonable for most of the world economy anyway. Not to mention US firms might be giving their employees a lot more than that. It's increasingly feeling, to me, that theres a gap building up between haves and have nots.…

Significantly cheaper than comparable models if you are using openrouter [0]. Just yesterday I spent roughly 13 cents centering some divs using Deepseek in a personal project. It would have been north of $1 to do that with a US frontier model.

0. https://openrouter.ai/compare/z-ai/glm-5.2/anthropic/claude-...

Re: GLM-5.2 is a step change for open agents

#40

Post by arikrahman »

jerojero wrote: post #3

Open weight models from Chinese labs tend to be significantly cheaper. I think theyre absolutely needed. I can't afford 200 USD a month for personal use of coding AI, and I don't think such prices are reasonable for most of the world economy anyway. Not to mention US firms might be giving their employees a lot more than that. It's increasingly feeling, to me, that theres a gap building up between haves and have nots.…

Someone else on this forum put it well, U.S. is trying to achieve AGI at all costs, while Chinese models are seeking widespread adoption.
Post reply on HN