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

Inkling: Our Open-Weights Model

thinkingmachines.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 324 posts

Re: Inkling: Our Open-Weights Model

#261

Post by juliangoetze »

embedding-shape wrote: post #258
juliangoetze wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This supposedly is better than KimiK2.7 How can you tell? I just looked at the benchmarks and was kinda disappointed that it seems to be between KimiK2.6 and KimiK2.7 on most of the benchmarks. Do you refer to what it feels like to use the model? Or are there other benchmarks I haven't seen?

Most of the random comments you read on HN and reddit about how nice/bad various LLMs are, is basically based on the commentator's "vibe" about it, and almost nothing is grounded in evidence or actual usage. Don't read too much into it, want to know how good a model is? Run it with your own non-public benchmark, basically the only way to get proper answers you can somewhat rely on, everything else is manipulated, mis…

I thought HN was different. And yeah, wherever I go, my timeline is full of Opus is so bad today and I will switch from Fable to 5.6 Sol, it's 1.5x better and vice versa.

Non-public benchmarks (ideally suited to one's own use case) are probably the best way to judge, I agree.

Re: Inkling: Our Open-Weights Model

#262

Post by upmind »

ls_stats wrote: post #2

America needs its own DeepSeek or Z.ai, a lot of people (myself included) root for open chinese models to win because they have no other choice. Thinking Machines might be it.

unlikely I think, they're likely doing this to garner some interest in their company but they seem pretty interested in revenue (judging by the companies they're working with)

Re: Inkling: Our Open-Weights Model

#263

Post by el1s7 »

paxys wrote: post #119
segmondy wrote: post #65

Very nice, multi modal, largest open weight model that supports audio. Would be interesting to see how good the audio capability is. If you want to run locally, checkout https://github.com/danielhanchen/llama.cpp/tree/add-inkling https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/inkling https://huggingface.co/unsloth/inkling-GGUF https://huggingface.co/unsloth/inkling-NVFP4 This supposedly is better than KimiK2.7, as much hype as GLM5.…

Not to mention - it is American. This is the first competitive non-Chinese open weights model since what, Llama 3?

Or rather, Albanian.

Re: Inkling: Our Open-Weights Model

#265

Post by sigbottle »

fwipsy wrote: post #204
SilverSlash wrote: post #200

Do you think the barbarians are at the gates of OpenAI and Anthropic? If cheaper, open weights models can seriously take revenue away from those two labs for (frontier - 1) model use cases (which are the models most enterprises will choose) then OpenAI and Anthropic are left only with users using their latest and greatest model AND who will keep upgrading to the newer ones?

Bull case: iteration becomes so quick that frontier-1 won't cut it. OpenAI and Anthropic are both betting on the singularity, I suppose.

The "singularity" as stated requires AI to either make a technological advancement strong enough to be deadly to humans (besides just intelligence), or spreading deep institutional support for itself among society.

The idea that "we will get superintelligence first, then... ???" is kind of a weird notion. I mean, it's pretty arguable that we do have at least some form of superintelligence. The AI itself needs to actually do something with it though. Either that, or more likely, someone needs to do something bad with the superintelligence.

That could be both re-assuring or not. Because under that view, given how AI is being integrated so quickly into society, it's not going to take this fantasy view of superintelligence to reach the singularity. If you have broad institutional support and crowd out the thing we call humanity over time (the two ways to 'solve' a problem: solve it, or declare it meaningless), that is another way to reach the singularity.

Re: Inkling: Our Open-Weights Model

#266

Post by minraws »

lostmsu wrote: post #230
minraws wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to say this but Nemotron is not worth running on any sillicon, given Nvidia has been doing it for 3+ years, if Nvidia instead gave away GLM or KIMI API for free no one would use Nemotron the reason it's so wildly used is because Nvidia offers a Free API...

There's a free API for Nemotron? Severely limited I imagine.

I have never used it enough to exhaust it but on openrouter I burnt a good 100M tokens through it

Re: Inkling: Our Open-Weights Model

#267

Post by Certhas »

alightsoul wrote: post #225
HaloZero wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think practically every government will want to put restrictions on private companies building models. Frankly the EU and the US will practically be less involved and have more pushback from the public in this than China. I think that’s less “China bad” than recognizing that China is a more authoritarian state and has far more proclivity to interfere than western states. Maybe I’m wrong? What does deep seek say abo…

Ask an American model about the Epstein files and trump's involvement of them. Or about Israel committing genocide in Palestine. Every model will have their own bias. Freedom is relative and American freedom is not the only form of freedom. China bad or China authoritarian and thus not free is a result of the red scare

Here is what Sonnet says on genocide:

"Surveys of genocide scholars (e.g., one by the journal Journal of Genocide Research contributors) show meaningful disagreement, though a visible and growing share of specialists in genocide studies specifically have concluded the term applies or is defensible — more so than international law scholars generally, who tend to be more cautious about the intent requirement."

You can be of the opinion that this shows bias, but it's a far cry from the Chinese censorship.

Clichés like "freedom is relative" are not serious arguments. You can't genuinely argue that the US, for all its problems, is less free than China. Words have meaning.

E.g. looking at freedom house index you can disagree on the precise score or how different aspects are weighed, but you can't argue with the underlying facts in the country reports

https://freedomhouse.org/country/scores

Re: Inkling: Our Open-Weights Model

#268

Post by jameshush »

vcryan wrote: post #94
janalsncm wrote: post #19

For the most part it’s better than Nemotron, worse than GLM. This makes it the best American open weights model from what I can tell?

I'm surprised that Nemotron gets mentioned at all. In my experiments with it for coding tasks it performed extremely poorly, essentially unusable.

I focus on realtime voice AI uses cases and nemotron's time to first token is INSANELY fast. It's become a legit option for voice use cases

Re: Inkling: Our Open-Weights Model

#269

Post by hham »

Smart that she says "not the strongest overall model, open or closed". This is a rare for an AI lab to say out loud. They basically decided to compete on customizability, and not on topping the temporary leaderboard. Also corroborates what we recently wrote: any Lab's capability lead cant hold for long anyway, it's a "red queen race" that never settles: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48892559

Re: Inkling: Our Open-Weights Model

#270

Post by fmajid »

drob518 wrote: post #158
fmajid wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jensen Huang is just trying to commoditize the complements to his GPUs.

Cf Microsoft v Intel circa 1995

Usually software wins over hardware, but the voracious appetite of LLMs has inverted the usual balance of power.
Post reply on HN