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

GLM 5.2 and the coming AI margin collapse

martinalderson.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 495 posts

Re: GLM 5.2 and the coming AI margin collapse

#441

Post by mwigdahl »

ben_w wrote: post #291
logicchains wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europe became powerful before it was unified, and ever since the creation of the EU it's been becoming less and less important on the world stage.

We first became powerful because we did the industrial revolution before anyone else, and used more of that capacity to fight the world (and win) than to fight each other. When we fought each other, after the industrial revolution, that was the Napoleonic Wars and the two World Wars. > and ever since the creation of the EU it's been becoming less and less important on the world stage. I wouldn't say it was "ever sinc…

There were a lot of European wars between the Napoleonic Wars and the First World War. I agree with your point overall but there was a lot of fighting each other during that timeframe.

Re: GLM 5.2 and the coming AI margin collapse

#442

Post by smrtinsert »

fny wrote: post #5

I'm not convinced raw costs matter: 1. Compute costs collapsed since the advent of Cloud and yet hyperscalers still have fat margins. 2. Many open source office suites exist yet none compete with the ubiquity of gsuite or office. GitHub, Slack are similar examples. 3. Both Windows and macOS dominate the home desktop space despite free alternatives existing for a long time. 4. Many formerly open source infrastructure…

The same critique of those points can be made which was in the article. The cost of switching is minimal.

This isn't SAP or a CRM or some other business where workflow = moat.

Re: GLM 5.2 and the coming AI margin collapse

#443

Post by pocksuppet »

klipt wrote: post #341
pocksuppet wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without the indecisive government action that was taken, millions more people would have died, but the economy would have done better. With decisive government action (see New Zealand), millions less people would have died, and the economy would have done better.

New Zealand does have the advantage of an ocean border and thus near total control on entries and exits. Compared to the very porous land borders of the US.

Come on, they're not that porous, certainly under a Trump administration. People fly into NZ too.

Re: GLM 5.2 and the coming AI margin collapse

#444

Post by pocksuppet »

Xunjin wrote: post #356
pocksuppet wrote: post #326

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without the indecisive government action that was taken, millions more people would have died, but the economy would have done better. With decisive government action (see New Zealand), millions less people would have died, and the economy would have done better.

This argument is so flawed in many ways, economies are built by people for people. Extrapolate the numbers, let's say in the COVID Pandemic a country, take USA as example, has 10% percentage of their population killed by it, would that be better to the economy?

Economies are built by rich people for rich people. A few million poor people dead doesn't really make a dent in them.

Re: GLM 5.2 and the coming AI margin collapse

#445

Post by ChrisLTD »

fodkodrasz wrote: post #420
alecco wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48816025 And EU leadership completely destroyed Europe's future by betting on depending on US and Chinese models. https://pleias.ai/blog/fable-eu

Why? Worst se we are 10 years behind them. Second mover advantage will also be there, it this is so critical indeed. What happened to China because they were third movers in the race to the nuclear weapons? Nothing. They were pretty behind for a while technologically. The wheels have turned. Stop looking at the world as a short strategy game match, or like a Hollywood movie where everything is all-or-nothing. Many pa…

If anything the first movers would theoretically be the first to destroy their own labor markets and economies.

Re: GLM 5.2 and the coming AI margin collapse

#446

Post by mattmatheus »

Gareth321 wrote: post #241
typ wrote: post #236

Unlike the belief that frontier AI is expensive due to a high margin, and going to be expensive if there is no competition. My understanding is that, under certain circumstances (which is most likely true), the price will be driven down just because of profit seeking. The frontier LLM labs run on a huge fixed cost and very low marginal cost. They need the economies of scale to make sense of the business (an incentive…

I agree, but there is prestige to consider. Many people are motivated to buy the best, even if it's much more expensive. "We're building a mission critical application here. Sure the API costs are much higher, but it's worth it."

Quite a lot of people think they're far better engineers than they really are, myself included. I've gotten better over the past few years at realizing that AI writes better code than me, which has made it easier for me to stick to architecture and let the (working) code be what it is.

Re: GLM 5.2 and the coming AI margin collapse

#447

Post by [deleted] »

sajithdilshan wrote: post #424
nightski wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meta's FAIR has several R&D offices in the EU, yes. So you are saying their labs can conduct R&D on models in the EU, potentially even train them there, they just can't have production LLM inference serving or release the model weights? I'm just not seeing it. A not-insignificant portion of the AI/ML research community is in the EU.

What you’re failing to understand is that meta is ultimately a US company. If meta unveils a powerful frontier model tomorrow and US impose a ban of its exports, regardless of how many research, data centres, meta has in EU, they will restrict access to the model for EU citizens, same way Anthropic did. Regarding the open weights, I don’t see meta doing that for their future models, especially once they have their ow…

[deleted]

Re: GLM 5.2 and the coming AI margin collapse

#448

Post by KronisLV »

NostraDavid wrote: post #299
pixlmint wrote: post #199

Last month, I cancelled my Claude Pro subscription and instead used those 20$ to purchase Openrouter Credits. Most of my knowledge-seeking questions can be answered by Gemma4, for basic code editing, Qwen3.6 27b is enough, and for really difficult tasks, GLM5.2 doesn't leave me hanging. I'm by no means a heavy AI user, so I'm even saving money going the API Credit route and relying on the smallest possible model depe…

What do you use as interface to OpenRouter? I, too, am looking into using an API to see if I can reduce costs (I use OpenAI + Github Copilot, currently). TensorX instead of OpenRouter (because it's in Europe, and EURouter wanted 15% more money from me :P), but I'm not sure if I want to change a configuration in vscode every time I want to switch the model in the Claude extension (and having an API key in my settings…

In VSCode: Cline or KiloCode are both good.

In the terminal: you can get Claude Code or others working but honestly OpenCode or Pi might be better with many models.

Re: GLM 5.2 and the coming AI margin collapse

#449

Post by nickthegreek »

echelon wrote: post #388
cbg0 wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We're accelerating at lightning speed now. Accelerating how much slop you can output? A better model will still produce slop for your feature factory that pumps out software which nobody is interested in buying.

I'm at a 3M run rate in 4 months. Because I'm solving real problems. You don't seem like an entrepreneur. Why are you on HN? YC wants people to build AI startups. You're here shitting on them. Half of this community is. You're all a bunch of old men grumpy at the new tools. I'll offer my own analysis: if you're not using AI very effectively, you won't have a career in computing in a few years.

You don't need to be an entrepreneur to be here. The majority of viewers certainly are not.

Re: GLM 5.2 and the coming AI margin collapse

#450

Post by chairmansteve »

byzantinegene wrote: post #183
pants2 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're developing on top of LLM APIs directly, this is definitely not true. There are differences in how context caching works, in what's available through native harnesses, the types of tools you're fine-tuned on (GPT uses apply_patch while Claude uses edit, with different formats), the API surface (Agents SDK, Responses API, Managed Agents), cost structures, and best-practice guidance all around. Not to mention…

just use your agents to do the migration, that's what it's good at.

Exactly, the LLM itself can do the migration, surely?
Post reply on HN