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

101–110 of 240 posts

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

#101

Post by xydone »

nwienert wrote: post #45
martinjc wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you aware of how much purchasing power 200 dollars is in china, brazil, thailand or india is? This is an extremely arrogant take.

I’ve hired many asian developers anywhere from 1-4k a month. I get a lot more out of a 200/mo subscription now in a week than I did from them in a month. Now obviously in today’s world they’d be using a 200/mo subscription themselves. But it’s not like money is nothing, software development doesn’t scale down below 1k/mo for anyone competent even in the poorest areas.

The point the post you replied to is making is that while you get value out of it, and in your case it's not that expensive, it's just simply not the case worldwide

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

#102

Post by nwienert »

xydone wrote: post #101
nwienert wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve hired many asian developers anywhere from 1-4k a month. I get a lot more out of a 200/mo subscription now in a week than I did from them in a month. Now obviously in today’s world they’d be using a 200/mo subscription themselves. But it’s not like money is nothing, software development doesn’t scale down below 1k/mo for anyone competent even in the poorest areas.

The point the post you replied to is making is that while you get value out of it, and in your case it's not that expensive, it's just simply not the case worldwide

I don’t think you’re really reading between the lines.

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

#103

Post by dools »

teravor wrote: post #95
dools wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reasoning traces always look terrible and they’re frustrating to watch. It’s the same with Kimi. What’s interesting is that the end result is then good. I think it’s just some sort of devils advocate trick to get better output.

as compared to what though? you can't see the actual think traces for opus or gpt.

Compared to what comes out at the end. Like if you sit there watching Kimi k2.6 "think", you're like "what? no you fucking idiot!" and you get this urge to "steer" it and so on, but very rarely is that steering actually necessary, it just winds up popping out the correct answer and all of those 'Wait! That's it! I found it! Actually ... Let me just' is just whatever internal processing it needed to use to get to the correct response. Mostly likely it's just being self-adversarial and exploring a bunch of dumb avenues to isolate the best outcome with the highest probability

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

#104

Post by Turskarama »

azinman2 wrote: post #48
arikrahman wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't think anthropic/openai/google aren't also seeing widespread adoption. In fact they already have they already have the marketshare.

The difference is that the US companies are using it as a means to an end, they need to make just enough profit that the investors don't all get cold feet before they get to AGI. The Chinese companies on the other hand are trying to be profitable immediately, which means that they're going slower to save development costs.

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

#105

Post by devmor »

selcuka wrote: post #70
devmor wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I personally don’t find it that useful for most tasks, but if say, you get paid $50/hr for your work and it saves you more than 4 hours of work in a month, there you go.

Obviously this assumes that you can find 4+ extra hours of $50/hr work every month, or you can work 4 hours less. Neither of these assumptions is correct for people who work for a fixed salary.

That doesn’t change value. It’s value whether or not you can maintain a profit over it.

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

#106

Post by brian-armstrong »

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.…

I read these stories and I can never figure out how people are managing to use these $200 plans. If I really go full bore, I can sometimes max out the $20 plan. Even then, it already produces more code than I can reasonably review and merge.

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

#107

Post by dash2 »

martinjc wrote: post #8
ttoinou wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

200 is much less than the value you’re supposed to get out of it. If it’s not then yeah go ahead and use cheaper models with worst quality

Are you aware of how much purchasing power 200 dollars is in china, brazil, thailand or india is? This is an extremely arrogant take.

Parent’s point was that many many people will get much more than $200 value from the “expensive” model. Sure, a Bihar farmer won’t, but even an Indian software developer may easily do if he or she has Western clients.

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

#108

Post by ipaddr »

brian-armstrong wrote: post #106
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.…

I read these stories and I can never figure out how people are managing to use these $200 plans. If I really go full bore, I can sometimes max out the $20 plan. Even then, it already produces more code than I can reasonably review and merge.

I've maxed out my chatgpt plus the first week and that include an smf forum rewrite. Trying my best I haven't been able to max out again. Things are setup that you need to max out your 5 hour window multiple times which becomes a job in itself.

At work I'm struggling to keep my claude bill around $500.

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

#109

Post by tacomagick »

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.

For my case Openrouter breaks Deepseek caching and charges me multiple times over what I pay for Deepseek's API, with 2$ I was able to get around 120M tokens from deepseek easily when Openrouter could only barely do 250k

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

#110

Post by try-working »

guybedo wrote: post #88
try-working wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kimi and GLM models have coined a new term: Thinkslop. They run a chain of thought that is up to 10x longer than other models and it seems that through a lookback mechanism they are able to use the CoT to reason about solutions to tasks they couldn't otherwise solve. The downside is of course that they consume many more tokens off your plan, and also that they are significantly slower. Kimi K2.7 takes about 7x longer…

yeah Kimi K2.7 was doing ok but was painfully slow. The coding plan limits were good though. I haven't tried deepseek yet, i should check this one out.

After the release of K2.7, the Kimi plan quotas have been reduced by about 80%.
Post reply on HN