Earlier quoted context omitted.
As always, note: faster than GLM-5.2 doesn't mean too much, as GLM-5.2 is served by different providers, so the inference speed can vary drastically between providers or over time.
What’s everyone favorite GLM provider? z.ai doesnt always have the most reliable AI but I don’t mind the party seeing my trade secrets and thoughts compared to an American corporation + the party seeing my trade secrets and thoughts. So thats not a functional difference to me, and the Chinese one won’t reply to subpoenas so thats a value add tbh So I’ll consider all, fastest tokens/sec wins
Claude Sonnet 5
521–530 of 822 posts
Re: Claude Sonnet 5
#522Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're actively trying to use lobbying power to make open weight models illegal. So I'm just not going to use their services at all anymore. I don't think they're a net gain if you're a skilled senior, and the hidden cost in terms of technical debt and skill atrophy is just being swept under the rug. I'll be okay without their bullshit generator.
> They're actively trying to use lobbying power to make open weight models illegal. What is your evidence?
> "Once the weights of a model are public, they cannot be retrieved. If a model possesses dangerous capabilities, it is permanently out in the wild... We need to consider regulatory frameworks that account for the unique risks of open-source distribution of highly capable frontier models."
Re: Claude Sonnet 5
#523Earlier quoted context omitted.
What’s everyone favorite GLM provider? z.ai doesnt always have the most reliable AI but I don’t mind the party seeing my trade secrets and thoughts compared to an American corporation + the party seeing my trade secrets and thoughts. So thats not a functional difference to me, and the Chinese one won’t reply to subpoenas so thats a value add tbh So I’ll consider all, fastest tokens/sec wins
I'm biased because I run an inference company, https://synthetic.new . That being said I think we're pretty good at serving at GLM-5.2 — and other models, like Kimi K2.7! — and our privacy policy is quite good: zero data retention for prompts and completions on API requests. Our average streaming TPS for GLM-5.2 (aka, tokens after factoring out time-to-first-token, which varies based on geography) is 97tps over the l…
Re: Claude Sonnet 5
#524Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's possibly the worst pelican I saw from all recent LLMs. Meanwhile GLM 5.2 drew a cool self-contained fully animated SVG pelican: https://simonwillison.net/2026/Jun/17/glm-52
Yeah, GLM have been beating Anthropic on the pelicans for a while now. (I suspect that's more of an indication that Anthropic have chosen not to waste resources training on animals riding vehicles, personally.)
Re: Claude Sonnet 5
#525Claude Sonnet 5 is built to be the most agentic Sonnet model yet. It can make plans, use tools like browsers and terminals, and run autonomously at a level that, just a few months ago, required larger and more expensive models. I have been using Sonnet 4.6 more than Opus, because I'm mostly doing agent-assisted development and not fully agent-driven development. This announcement does not make me positive, I have fou…
I give AI an image and just it what's wrong, and then it goes on to fix the bug in the codebase for me ( and write the tests), is this agent-assist or agent-driven?
Sometimes I just give the AI my description, and mockup, and it creates a plan and implements the details for me, and I verify visually ( this is the weak spot of AI), is this agent-assist or agent-driven?
Re: Claude Sonnet 5
#526Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're actively trying to use lobbying power to make open weight models illegal. So I'm just not going to use their services at all anymore. I don't think they're a net gain if you're a skilled senior, and the hidden cost in terms of technical debt and skill atrophy is just being swept under the rug. I'll be okay without their bullshit generator.
> They're actively trying to use lobbying power to make open weight models illegal. What is your evidence?
Re: Claude Sonnet 5
#527Earlier quoted context omitted.
FWIW I do think that availability of competitive open weight and other non-frontier models, along with improvements in harnesses that can get good results out of these models, will result in less concentration and a healthier marketplace. However, these frontier labs are also making moves that could let them capture a disproportionate share of the upside. One possibility is a situation analogous to the smartphone man…
Apple you can’t exit the ecosystem. Samsung the same. And is the best android device. If tomorrow comes a Nokia os will be dead in the water: it has no apps. But with a new llm that doesn’t matter. There is nothing sticky about typing Gemini, Claude or codex in a cli.
The AI labs are also making moves to secure long-term enterprise presence, such as their Forward Deployed Engineer strategy. I think that is a trojan horse play that could make enterprises dependent on them forever, much like so many companies are still dependent on IBM's mainframes. As an extreme example, you could imagine a company's core business logic encoded in the weights of a proprietary model custom-trained and hosted by one of these model providers, something even more inscrutable and sticky than ancient COBOL codebases.
Re: Claude Sonnet 5
#528Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I want is a harness that knows how to optimize this kind of thing for me.
In practice I don't think any harness (happy to be corrected here!) uses the lesser capability models for writing code. The cost trade-offs are rarely worth it. They are often used for reading code though. To expand on this, while the "big model to write a plan, small model to write the specific code" idea is quite common it trips up on edge cases. In theory the flow works like this: - small fast models read lots of…
Re: Claude Sonnet 5
#529Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are they benefiting from the insane valuations though? If the valuations deflate before the insiders are able to exit, I think that would be worse for them than a lower but sustainable valuation. It all comes down to whose prediction of the future is closer to correct. I think the most likely future is commodification of inference and "agent-assisted" rather than "agent-driven" workflows dominating the future of work…
It’s all about timing. This is tech bubble 2.0, Dotcom Boogaloo. If you’re able to flip it quickly, you’ll have generational wealth. If not, you could be holding a lot of worthless paper.
But is your impression that this is the strategy of people like Amodei? My impression is that it isn't, that they are actually true believers, and not just trying to hit the timing right and flip it.
Re: Claude Sonnet 5
#530Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They're actively trying to use lobbying power to make open weight models illegal. What is your evidence?
Dario’s own mouth https://x.com/coinbureau/status/2071330294452666695/mediavie...