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

Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 211 posts

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#51

Post by jjj123 »

w4yai wrote: post #46
Certhas wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually the real danger is mass labor market disruption, and a massive shift of power from labour to capital. As was highlighted in previous discussions, the industrial revolution took 80 years to start benefiting workers. The continued impact of automation at least contributed to the rise of right wing extremism and an erosion of democracy all over the west. Now we face a development that has the potential to be fa…

> the industrial revolution took 80 years to start benefiting workers Come on. This is dishonesty and isn't the reality. We may agree that the Industrial Revolution may have taken decades (certainly not 80 years) for its benefits to be *clearly and widely* felt by workers, but anything further is an abusive claim. So what, because the progress doesn't benefit to workers instantly, we shouldn't do it ? In the end, wha…

You asked where the danger was, the response told you that disrupting the status quo can be dangerous.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#52

Post by nullbio »

ceejayoz wrote: post #50
nullbio wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

> Now no one can access ChatGPT 5.6 because of their 5 year long fearmongering regulatory capture campaign. I'm sympathetic to this arguement, but it's silly to ignore the other half; that the administration has openly feuding with them for months over limits to military capabilities. https://www.politico.com/news/2026/06/04/hegseth-anthropic-d...

No one is ignoring the other half, the feud is rooted in Anthropic's insatiable desire for power and control over everyone and everything, including the administration. The same desire that is fueling the strategic fearmongering campaign underpins all of their behavior and the repercussions and sentiment they're facing from the administration and the general public.

If their company hadn't been posturing like this for 5 years they'd have played ball with the administration like all of the other AI companies and they wouldn't have caught all that heat and taken down the AI industry with them. Just remember that Dario was pushing the narrative that GPT 2 was too dangerous to release to the public, while he was working at OpenAI. GPT 2!

Now it's an inevitability that China takes the lead - which was probably the case anyway, but a certainty if this continues.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#53

Post by lelanthran »

clusterhacks wrote: post #47
lelanthran wrote: post #12

Feels like I need to repeat myself more than once a day now: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48697258 > These companies providing tokens, whether SOTA or not, that want to IPO are so fucked as time goes on. >Can't sell their SOTA models, only slightly better than the open source models for the models they can sell, cost 20x to 50x for good models, a TAM that consists almost solely of developers, with no customer…

I used to agree with you but now do not. I now think the floor for this market is probably no worse than the annual revenue of cell phone plans in the US market. So say, $250 billion. Now, that probably doesn't justify the valuations and hype being thrown around, but I think it gets at a real revenue number. I also don't know how that number fits into the funding rounds already raised and VC dreams of IPOs for these…

> I used to agree with you but now do not. I now think the floor for this market is probably no worse than the annual revenue of cell phone plans in the US market. So say, $250 billion.

I don't think we're talking about the same thing. I'm talking about what their IPO is going to do to their share price.

In any case, $250b revenue translates to, best case scenario, $50b profit. On an investment of $1t. It does not look good for those companies making up the $1t investment.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#54

Post by lelanthran »

fassssst wrote: post #19
lelanthran wrote: post #12

Feels like I need to repeat myself more than once a day now: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48697258 > These companies providing tokens, whether SOTA or not, that want to IPO are so fucked as time goes on. >Can't sell their SOTA models, only slightly better than the open source models for the models they can sell, cost 20x to 50x for good models, a TAM that consists almost solely of developers, with no customer…

> a TAM that consists almost solely of developers That’s the wrong assumption. These models are good at office docs too.

> That’s the wrong assumption. These models are good at office docs too.

The cheap models handle that very well. The SOTA models still only have target TAM of developers only.

You only need SOTA for development. The $1t investment is in SOTA companies.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#56

Post by ceejayoz »

nullbio wrote: post #52
ceejayoz wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now no one can access ChatGPT 5.6 because of their 5 year long fearmongering regulatory capture campaign. I'm sympathetic to this arguement, but it's silly to ignore the other half; that the administration has openly feuding with them for months over limits to military capabilities. https://www.politico.com/news/2026/06/04/hegseth-anthropic-d...

No one is ignoring the other half, the feud is rooted in Anthropic's insatiable desire for power and control over everyone and everything, including the administration. The same desire that is fueling the strategic fearmongering campaign underpins all of their behavior and the repercussions and sentiment they're facing from the administration and the general public. If their company hadn't been posturing like this fo…

> No one is ignoring the other half, the feud is rooted in Anthropic's insatiable desire for power and control over everyone and everything, including the administration.

Again, this is ignoring half of it. See what they did to Intel prior:

https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/07/business/intel-ceo-resign-tru...

"President Donald Trump on Thursday demanded the resignation of Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan following reports and allegations that he has ties to China."

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/11/intel-ceo-trump-lip-bu-tan.h...

"President Donald Trump said Monday that he and members of his cabinet met with Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan, days after he called on the head of the chipmaker to resign. Intel shares rose 2% in extended trading."

https://newsroom.intel.com/corporate/intel-and-trump-adminis...

"U.S. Government to make $8.9 billion investment in Intel common stock as company builds upon its more than $100 billion expansion of resilient semiconductor supply chain."

This make them Intel's largest shareholder.

Reminder: the American right went all the way to SCOTUS (successfully! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masterpiece_Cakeshop_v._Colora...) on the legal theory that businesses must have the right to decline customers they don't like.

> Just remember that Dario was pushing the narrative that GPT 2 was too dangerous to release to the public, while he was working at OpenAI. GPT 2!

Is that truly outrageous?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Pile-1 wasn't dangerous on its own. But it led to the Tsar Bomba.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#57

Post by clusterhacks »

lelanthran wrote: post #53
clusterhacks wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to agree with you but now do not. I now think the floor for this market is probably no worse than the annual revenue of cell phone plans in the US market. So say, $250 billion. Now, that probably doesn't justify the valuations and hype being thrown around, but I think it gets at a real revenue number. I also don't know how that number fits into the funding rounds already raised and VC dreams of IPOs for these…

> I used to agree with you but now do not. I now think the floor for this market is probably no worse than the annual revenue of cell phone plans in the US market. So say, $250 billion. I don't think we're talking about the same thing. I'm talking about what their IPO is going to do to their share price. In any case, $250b revenue translates to, best case scenario, $50b profit. On an investment of $1t. It does not lo…

Gotcha. I'm past the point of having any confident thoughts about what happens to their share price at IPO.

What about the idea that there is a high likelihood that the potential share price for OpenAI and Anthropic are both going to be pretty divorced from a rational market price for either?

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#58

Post by h26d3r »

w4yai wrote: post #26
lagrange77 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is scary.

It is not. Where's the danger ? We will need to adapt, as in every technology progress, but what do you think will happen ? Realistically ? Don't feed the fearmongering. Yes, we're disrupting the status quo, if that's the danger, then welcome to the world.

Any superintelligence operating under a consistent moral framework will decide to extinguish humanity with as little ecological damage as possible, because humans cannot coexist with other life on this planet. It will realize that a bioweapon is the ideal choice.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#59

Post by dragonwriter »

h26d3r wrote: post #58
w4yai wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not. Where's the danger ? We will need to adapt, as in every technology progress, but what do you think will happen ? Realistically ? Don't feed the fearmongering. Yes, we're disrupting the status quo, if that's the danger, then welcome to the world.

Any superintelligence operating under a consistent moral framework will decide to extinguish humanity with as little ecological damage as possible, because humans cannot coexist with other life on this planet. It will realize that a bioweapon is the ideal choice.

> Any superintelligence operating under a consistent moral framework will decide to extinguish humanity with as little ecological damage as possible, because humans cannot coexist with other life on this planet.

There are plenty of internally consistent moral frameworks which would not favor this action even if the premise were true (and that premise seems at best unjustified and at least overstated.)

Post reply on HN