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

ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

zcode.z.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 382 posts

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#81

Post by fcarraldo »

daytonix wrote: post #22
toddmorey wrote: post #15

Does anyone use an agnostic TUI or harness for development tasks that can fairly seamlessly switch between providers? I'm wanting local context in the spirit of "here are 3 AI providers available, for coding tasks use this one... and for writing prose use this one... and for generating images use this one..." etc.

have used both pi and opencode for the last 6 months, haven't opened a proprietary harness (cc, codex, cursor) in that same amount of time. right now i'm on pi and i can switch seamlessly between any model across any provider i want, even mid session. can even point them at locally running models. i think people don't realize how much better life is over on this side, cc and codex rely entirely on vendor lock in imo.

Does a mid-session provider switch result in loading the entire context into the new model, inflating session cost?

I don't think I understand the token/cost implications of this feature

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#82

Post by cube00 »

It's impressive all these companies are getting away with "base usage allowance included" [1] or "standard limits" [2], layering the higher plans as a multiplier of that "base" but never disclosing what it is.

I guess the base is whatever the profit margin needs to be this month.

[1]: https://zcode.z.ai/en#:~:text=Base%20usage%20allowance%20inc...

[2]: https://support.google.com/gemini/answer/16275805?hl=en#:~:t...

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#83

Post by TurdF3rguson »

d3Xt3r wrote: post #77
qaz_plm wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peak hours are 14:00–18:00 (UTC+8) https://docs.z.ai/devpack/overview

Thanks. Those are some odd hours though, why would evening time be peak hours? Usually (in the western world anyway), 9AM - 12PM would be peak hours. Things normally slow down post-lunch, and be its slowest at close-of-business.

Because westerners are using it is my guess and for them that's right in your window

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#84

Post by tristor »

maxloh wrote: post #51

I don't find a closed-source Chinese agent system trustworthy. It is essentially a black box with full user permissions, meaning you are just handing over your entire system to a Chinese-owned server. With OpenCode and its GLM provider, at least I can monitor which files were read, which were edited, and what commands were executed. Not to mention that Chinese national security laws legally obligate companies to coop…

As someone who loves using OpenCode w/ local Chinese open source models, this is basically my take on this as well. There's no way I would ever put a piece of proprietary Chinese software that gets full system control on anything important. This is definitely something I would only ever run sandboxed in a lab environment for toy projects, not for serious work. I feel only marginally better about Codex/Claude Code, hence my strong preference for local LLMs w/ OpenCode, but a proprietary approach to Chinese models is a hard no from me dawg.

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#85

Post by CptFribble »

ianm218 wrote: post #60
eeasss wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are not US based that’s not really a big concern.

I think it’s a real concern. Chinese companies are much more closely tied to the state, as in if you decide to go to China one day they might already have all the data on how you have interacted with their models. The US is certainly inching in that direction but it’s not like someone from the US government sits at Anthropic’s HQ reading chats from state people of interest.

> all the data on how you have interacted with their models

1) there is a very non-zero chance that the US government also has that data from OpenAI and possibly Anthropic

2) unless you are asking the chinese models to draw up plans to overthrow the chinese government, it's extremely unlikely they would ever care.

while china has a track record of harassing it's own dissident citizens abroad, if you're not chinese and not trying to subvert their government (or are a high-ranking government official yourself), it's kind of silly to suppose they would ever care about you or what you do.

and if you have information they want for their own national development purposes, like EUV engineers, they are much more likely to offer you fabulous amounts of money instead of try to intimidate or threaten it out of you.

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#86

Post by andy99 »

binarymax wrote: post #72
InsideOutSanta wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's comparable, but not the same. For some tasks, it's better. Opus refuses tasks for me pretty regularly. GLM 5.2 has never refused a task. So for anything security-related or that touches on topics that trigger Opus's safety guardrails, I use GLM 5.2. OTOH, for anything related to UI design, I use Opus 4.8. It's much better at taking relatively vague descriptions of user interfaces and a mockup of a related UI and…

What kinds of tasks does Opus refuse? I’m a light daily user for the past 3 months and Opus has never refused a task for me.

I’ve never had a refusal coding, and in some areas (AI red teaming specifically) I’ve found it quite good at recognizing and discussing “white hat” stuff that in the past I think would have got refusals.

But when there was the Hantavirus thing a while back, I asked it if there was a vaccine under development and got a refusal immediately. I’ve had a few like that. It seems they’ve implemented really poor guardrails on certain topics (CBRN and cyber) that have lots of false positives. But if you actually chat with the model itself it’s quite lucid about what is legitimately dangerous and what is just performative “AI Safety” style refusal.

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#87

Post by saberience »

ianm218 wrote: post #60
eeasss wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are not US based that’s not really a big concern.

I think it’s a real concern. Chinese companies are much more closely tied to the state, as in if you decide to go to China one day they might already have all the data on how you have interacted with their models. The US is certainly inching in that direction but it’s not like someone from the US government sits at Anthropic’s HQ reading chats from state people of interest.

It's interesting how you would say this about China but not about the US, especially given what's happened recently with Anthropic and the US govt.

Do you really think the US government doesn't get access or couldn't get access to any of your chats with Claude?

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#88

Post by D2OQZG8l5BI1S06 »

estearum wrote: post #80
simjnd wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. It doesn't make sense to me how much people trust our companies so much more than Chinese ones for no reason. This country has an abysmal track record when it comes to respecting its citizen's rights or privacy. Propaganda working as intended I suppose.

If you think the US has an "abysmal" track record on this, what words would you use to describe China's track record?

"abysmal" probably.

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#89

Post by Yiin »

estearum wrote: post #80
simjnd wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. It doesn't make sense to me how much people trust our companies so much more than Chinese ones for no reason. This country has an abysmal track record when it comes to respecting its citizen's rights or privacy. Propaganda working as intended I suppose.

If you think the US has an "abysmal" track record on this, what words would you use to describe China's track record?

depends if you look through China citizen point of view or someone in the west

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#90

Post by Natfan »

estearum wrote: post #80
simjnd wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you. It doesn't make sense to me how much people trust our companies so much more than Chinese ones for no reason. This country has an abysmal track record when it comes to respecting its citizen's rights or privacy. Propaganda working as intended I suppose.

If you think the US has an "abysmal" track record on this, what words would you use to describe China's track record?

also abysmal. two things can be bad at the same time
Post reply on HN