Live data from Hacker News

GLM-5.2 is a step change for open agents

interconnects.ai

141–150 of 240 posts

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

#141

I've been working with Deepseek V4 Flash (with opencode as the harness). It's been almost indistinguishable from Codex / Claude Code for me. I'm sure I'll run into problems when I get to a stickier ticket to tackle. But so far, it's been quite good, and I find it writes straightforward code. I do think the Chinese models are good enough for an 80/20 rule use case.

it would be a really great option if it didn't lack vision

For coding?

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

#142
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.…

Just don't ask it to tell you the events of June 4, 1989.

[flagged]

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

#143
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.

Simple: a lot of the people claiming they’re reviewing the output of these models are lying.

Also if you run the “loops” they’re now yapping about, it will burn through enormous amounts of usage as well.

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

#144
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.…

Just don't ask it to tell you the events of June 4, 1989.

Not that it matters but most of the open weight models aren’t actually censored that way: they run another layer on top of to do that. At least some of them do, Step 3.7 Flash locally happily tells me about the Tiananmen Square massacre

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

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. There's no way to verify what these providers are doing. The real future is running these models at home. Opus level inference on our own hardware would be a dream come true.

How will anyone running home instances be able to compete against people paying some money running much more powerful models on much more powerful hardware?

Yeah. There always will be a gab. And it will keep growing for the next years...

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

#146
post #112
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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-...

For centering divs the free models opencode offers can easily handle that work. DeepSeek V4 Flash is pretty decent.

Sure, but something that is “sonnet tier” is going to get there faster and with less pain. Well worth the 13 cents!

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

#147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of the AI companies in the US are on the path to AGI. They are, however, on the path to claiming they have AGI, then subsequently not releasing it and only giving it to the US government to make drones that can bomb the homes of political dissidents.

What kind of off topic political ideology spam is this? Do you not think that the Chinese kill their enemies? The Chinese are genociding Uyghurs as we speak, purely for being Muslim, in numbers that dwarf any harm the US has done.

> in numbers that dwarf any harm the US has done.

The list of wars the US is or was actively involved in[0] is SO LONG that the Wikipedia page is split into multiple different pages.

The main relevant ones are 20th[1] and 21st century[2], for which you better get a good grip on your mouse to scroll down.

I urge you to use your favorite AI to give you a rough summary of direct and indirect casualties of just those wars directly caused, started, or provoked by the US, from these lists.

For example, the "war on terror" alone has, so far, seen around 4.5–4.6 million+ people killed, and at least 38 million people displaced.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_wars_involving_the_Un...

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Uni...

[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Uni...

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

#149
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.…

Just don't ask it to tell you the events of June 4, 1989.

My work involves asking LLMs about both Tianenmen Square and what’s going on in Gaza, so I can’t use Chinese or American models!

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

#150
post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Simple: a lot of the people claiming they’re reviewing the output of these models are lying. Also if you run the “loops” they’re now yapping about, it will burn through enormous amounts of usage as well.

I can't even keep up with the chain of thought needed to manage a single session, let alone review. I typically never exceed 30% of a 5x plan. Fable took me almost to the limits, but not Opus. Claude design hits things harder, but still not to saturation.
Post reply on HN