51–60 of 151 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
yeah but why waste your time on these models, just use the one that gets the better results
Because you can get them from more trustworthy providers or with hardware encryption.
A company whose first demo was completely fraudulent announces that its model beats GPT-5.5, on its own benchmark? I’m gonna wait a little before I trust this. This whole company seems to optimize for raising money and impressing VCs. Lying about their products, ignoring consumer market to target enterprise, bragging about how they work their employees like slaves, and writing these posts full of intimidating technic…
To be fair it does seem like most AI startups are now like this (particularly when it comes to constantly mentioning how hard they work and ignoring consumer markets).
Remember when AGI was going to replace all jobs in 6 months? It's always been like that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Qwen was doing something like this with their coder models. But alas, they seem not to be releasing those anymore. Last one was Qwen3-coder-next.
I use this model. It's pretty good but not Opus 4.8 or Fable levels obviously. I'm really hoping we get more models like it (and better) soon. I run it locally and it's great that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
all the open source models are a waste of time relative to the bleeding edge from openai/anthropic
Not true since a few months, genuinely try GLM 5.2 and Minimax M3, especially in adversarial/gating... as a general model, I can agree, but as a coding model, they are not bad, comparable to maybe Opus 4.5 in real usage which is quite impressive.
At least with low level programming languages. They're all very good for webdev stuff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this open source? I can't find a link to download the weights.
It's based on an open weight model (Kimi 2.7) so shouldn't it also be open weight?
Should as in "would it be nice?" - yeah. Should as in they have to? No.
> Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the “Software”), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so
You can do pretty much anything you want with an MIT license.
Open source for the win! Imagine how far community might have pushed if 2 past versions of 'morally superior' Anthropic and 'completely Open AI' open sourced their models for the community to build on top of them
We need more models that optimize for coding and that can be cheaper than frontier models, like what SWE 1.7 and composer 2.5 are trying to do. I don't think there's an effort to make something GLM-5.2 level but focused only on coding.
Today my "coding" sessions often enough begin with real life problems, where I discuss domain or inter-domain things, ranging from business, economics, psychology, etc. Being able to do all of that with one model is something I am willing to pay a premium for.
Of course not having to pay the premium, because the routing is smart or whatever, would be great. I just don't want to have to think about it.