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

201–210 of 240 posts

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

#201

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

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

#202

Post by rescbr »

baq wrote: post #160
matheusmoreira wrote: post #55

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.

I dream of having an LLM in a box over usb bought off AliExpress for a year and change now. The LLM in a box is something you can buy today, but it 1. doesn’t serve over usb by default 2. costs $100k for hardware (not counting electricity) at 100 tps 3. can’t buy this from AliExpress. Better to put that $100k in t-bills and just buy tokens even at api prices.

I understand your point (and definitely want the same), but I do have an almost-AliExpress-LLM-in-a-box: it's an Thunderbolt eGPU dock (that I got from AliE, and it is USB-C...) with a RTX 4060 Ti with 16 GB of VRAM (bought locally for gaming before the price boom)

It's been awesome for embeddings and document OCR!

3D printing a case for it is on my todo list.

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

#203

Post by thefourthchime »

guybedo wrote: post #50

GLM-5.2 has been a step change in how fast i can burn through tokens. I subscribed to their max plan to try it out. It counted me 700M tokens and drained my weekly quota in under 2 days. Quota just reset less than 24h ago and i'm already >60% weekly quota usage. For reference the kind of work i did would have used somewhere between 3% and 5% of Codex max or Claude max. The model is good, the plan is a scam

I gave it my standard:

"Make a pac-man game in a single html page"

It went off and argued with itself for 20 minutes about how to lay out the map and then timed out.

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

#204

Post by theoli »

girvo wrote: post #143
brian-armstrong wrote: post #106

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.

Exactly this, it’s the loops. The first 50k tokens of a task is by far the most valuable. But when left to run independently, the agent will consume millions of tokens of error messages from running tests and discovering a minor syntax error, a missing import, a method call with incorrect parameters, etc. Then it will write some helper program while debugging the main task and get into the same loop debugging minor errors in the helper. From my experience, the vast majority of tokens consumed by Claude Code on totally independent tasks are consumed fixing minor mistakes it just made.

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

#205

Post by metobehonest »

dotancohen wrote: post #131
lionkor wrote: post #116

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.

The US funds Israel and it is only those funds and military aid that keep it from collapsing unto itself. That's the state that orchestrates the largest scale genocide by a "first world" power since WW2, as recognized by the United Nations and independent organizations like the Amnesty International.

https://amnesty.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/Amnesty-Intern...

Nothing China did comes close to this.

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

#206

Post by dotancohen »

mtlynch wrote: post #167
dotancohen wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you do differently that you expect to have better performance than an experienced, established player?

Not GP, but just being smaller makes it easier to achieve reliability. Like if you're a git forge with 100 similar customers, you can likely achieve an order of magnitude better reliability than GitHub, who is trying to serve millions of customers with wildly different needs.

The problems for services such as GitHub with scaling are reducing cost per customer. That's even more pertinent when discussing inference at scale.

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

#207

Post by rescbr »

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.

Z.ai legacy Pro coding plan which will last me until the end of the year + maki.sh as the agent.

OpenCode works fine, i just find it very resource intensive for no good reason.

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

#210

Post by pramodbiligiri »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #176
michimagdesign wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Next to my Claude Pro plan, I have subbed to OpenCode Go. I find the OpenCode UX much better than in Claude Code CLI. As for models, I started a few months ago with GLM 5.1 and it was solid and could archive near sonnet-level tasks. It weirdly sputtered out Chinese characters sometimes. Then I switched to Kimi K2.6, which is the Chinese model I used the most until now. It used way too many reasoning tokens (improved…

OpenCode Go looked intriguing and I spent time reading their docs and pricing but didn’t purchase services. Do you think they are running it at a loss to get market share? (Probably not.) I have been happy buying tokens directly from DeepSeek (I am retired and everything I do is open source code and writing open content books (the manuscript files are available along with the source code) so I have no privacy issues)…

It's possible they are running at a loss at present. But in a recent podcast their founder said he believes inference is profitable, based on their experience serving models: https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/opencode (search for "profitable")
Post reply on HN