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

211–220 of 382 posts

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#211

Post by ranyume »

SwellJoe wrote: post #181
ranyume wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When running the app, it actually tells you what the base usages are, but the name of the plans are different from the page. It reads: Start plan: 5 Million tokens a day (GLM-5.2 3M, GLM-5 Turbo 2M) For individuals: (+150% quota) $18.00USD+ For individual developers with a dedicated Coding Plan quota.

Now, if only we can figure out what all the others are providing as part of their subscriptions we can compare. (Though 3 million tokens of the top model per day seems kinda low. But, I guess that's what the 5x plan is for. I'd still like to be able to compare against all the big providers.)

Note that it says "start plan" without a price tag. The price tag for the other plan is the one on the page. I don't know what it is because I haven't set up an account to use it, I set up a custom provider in the app.

The app itself is interesting to me. I can see most of the agent trace (I can't see the tool definitions and the tool input args), I can set up skills and make the agent manage them and I can define sub-agents as well.

The UI itself is a bit weird, but I guess it's not thought to be a general purpose file editor.

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#212

Post by 0gs »

notshore wrote: post #178
SwellJoe wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't run agents directly on my desktop/laptop machine. I run them in VMs or containers (sometimes in containers on VMs). There have been too many credentials stealing exploits via prompt injection and the like for me to be willing to let an agent roam around on my personal system. I've also started creating new github deploy keys for each repo in use on a VM, so the blast area for any given agent disaster is "a co…

I'm working on a credential broker that would keep credentials vaulted and parcel out access on a per-grant basis. Is that something you'd find useful or is your setup comprehensive enough? We would be allowing people to draft access policies with natural language, I figured it would be useful for things like vercel, stripe access etc.

fwiw, i built something simple like this into my harness thing (github.com/0gsd/enough). may not be complicated enough to do per application nowadays vs. needing a modularized outside solution, but it is certainly a good idea that seems to work!

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#213

Post by mosbyllc »

There are now more and more Harness clients. I hope we can have the best open-source client and the best open-source models, as this would greatly facilitate our work and operations. However, this seems unlikely in the short term.

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#214

Post by Avicebron »

SwellJoe wrote: post #171
scorpioxy wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the trust concern for the agent running in any form on your machine? Like in a VM on your machine as well or do you mean on the host itself? I have read about people giving an agent full access to their main system saying they have nothing of value. To me, that's a strange opinion to have with the distinction between what's private and what's secret.

I don't run agents directly on my desktop/laptop machine. I run them in VMs or containers (sometimes in containers on VMs). There have been too many credentials stealing exploits via prompt injection and the like for me to be willing to let an agent roam around on my personal system. I've also started creating new github deploy keys for each repo in use on a VM, so the blast area for any given agent disaster is "a co…

This is what I do, VMs in proxmox. It works really well.

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#215

Post by mattnewton »

teaspoon wrote: post #71
SwellJoe wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even know what I would do with a desktop app. I'm running these things in headless VMs, so I can run them with `--dangerously-skip-permissions` or whatever. I don't trust them, even without that flag, on my desktop/laptop.

Good desktop apps in this category can manage agents across any number of remote SSH hosts.

But then I close my laptop and it’s not running on the headless host anymore right

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#216

Post by csomar »

SwellJoe wrote: post #101
teaspoon wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good desktop apps in this category can manage agents across any number of remote SSH hosts.

But, it's still running on my desktop/laptop. I don't trust them to run on my machine. But, I guess I could run one VM with a desktop to contain the desktop app. Or, just keep using CLI agents.

I mean, if the execution happen on the VM then the problem is trust on the programs and then you can't trust any program by that logic? That or you think AI-companies software is serious slop.

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#218

Post by bermudi »

LaurensBER wrote: post #38
seizethecheese wrote: post #11

I'm somewhat surprised that this is not open source (from what I can tell). Compare to Mimo Code https://github.com/XiaomiMiMo/MiMo-Code (which is a CLI, while this is a desktop app).

They might be sending some user requests to Anthropic to gather trading data for their own models. If they do so, perhaps they need to add some tracer to request that they prefer to hide.

I wonder if you're as cynical and untrustworthy of American companies as well or is it more of a racism kinda thing

Re: ZCode – Harness for GLM-5.2

#219

Post by bermudi »

cco wrote: post #124
seizethecheese wrote: post #11

I'm somewhat surprised that this is not open source (from what I can tell). Compare to Mimo Code https://github.com/XiaomiMiMo/MiMo-Code (which is a CLI, while this is a desktop app).

You're surprised? I think harnesses are almost as important as the underlying model. Folks have been able to improve benchmark results by nearly 2x based on harness alone. Harnesses are quickly becoming critical components of the "model" itself imo. Not shocking to me at all that a company that spots a revenue opportunity is keeping its harness closed source.

Source? The most trusted benchmark right now (deepSWE) scores better or just as well on their minimal harness than when using CC or codex
Post reply on HN