801–810 of 1001 posts
Based on my usage of Fable on the max plan, Anthropic is going to have to at least double the usage limits for it to be a viable option in the near future. And without Fable, the value proposition quickly drops to zero.
They probably knew a Fable contender was coming and hit the panic button, twice.
Working with chinese models is giving me a fullfilment sensation. I think that I have enough quality for the work that I need to do and lots of extra tokens to work with. With Claude and ChatGPT I reach the limits fairly easy, but not with OpenCode Go. So I will use Claude once in a while for difficult tasks to see how much better it still is (but use Chinese on a daily basis)
Opus 4.8 came out as a winner by 1 task only where both DS4 pro and flash looped out of "focus". But flash performed as well or better (as in being more thorough) in 13 out if 16.
The way I see it even DS4 flash is as efficient as top dogs and only starts lagging on very vibecodey (generating lots of stuff) or very difficult bugs. But you're really spending low cents amounts for your tasks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Instead of limiting models and debating ethics This is what liability management looks like for proprietary models. If it's not out in the open, then you can be held directly accountable for generating the tokens that kill people. They're having these conversations to avoid being held liable, not because they're offended by people dying because of AI.
[flagged]
For day-to-day programming work, have you seen a difference in the quality of output between (Opus 4.6 / GPT 5.2 / GPT-5.3 Codex) and the current (GPT-5.6 / Fable) that justifies the price increase ? My intuition says that the output quality difference is marginal compared to the change in price especially when taking into account the effects of prompt/context engineering and harness differences. Essentially: since o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
An approach I like to help solving this is antagonistic or review agents. The first agent decides that eye glows turn NPCs into enemies, the second agent is fully dedicated to deciding if that is valid. If the review fails, it leaves notes and the original agent tries again.
This is also the best approach I've found thus far when I'm seeing how well LLMs can form narrative content. I don't frame its prompt as antagonistic though - I've found in the past (with weaker models, so YMMV) that this can be overly officious, sometimes blocking more creative outputs that you'd want to retain. The structure I've found that works best is to have six or seven agents chained, each roughly mimicking a…
So Chinese labs are driving essentially towards commodotized intelligence. Even if its a few months behind the US. Is this a classic 'commoditize my compliment' situation? They want to sell the hardware and infrastructure behind AI and make the software part not the value driver / moat? I can see it. But also even two Chinese labs sinking 100s of millions USD into training isn't exactly commoditization. It's still a…
This is strategy by Chinese government, so much of US economy is invested in AI. Releasing free or cheap versions of the models undermines US economic growth. It’s asymmetric strategy that makes sense if you are close second in AI race. If situation is reversed, US would do the same.
In a world, that's increasingly dependant on the AI "opium" that the US is dealing, it's conceivable that the current administration could try to sabotage something like, say Chinese-European relationships, by threatening to cut access to Anthropic or OpenAI products for Europeans, if China cosies up to the EU.
The disadvantage of trying to use these leverages, is that once the genie's out of the bottle, the other party will divert their focus quickly, so it only works if the US truly has a choke-hold on frontier AI. Otherwise, you just scared the other party into never trusting American frontier AI ever, and you didn't even truly hurt them, because they already have a quick fix from China.
Unfortunately behind a paywall, but there's an article in the previous issue of Foreign Affairs about how the Trump administration has fumbled this coercion strategy repeatedly because they overestimated their advantage in different markets (tariffs on Canada, Iran, etc) and what an actually effective strategy can look like https://www.foreignaffairs.com/united-states/how-fight-econo...
tl; dr: You need to have a monopoly, the enemy should not bounce back quickly, you shouldn't cripple your own economy doing it.
AI may just be the next economic offensive the Trump administration fumbles, because China planned ahead by incentivising development of close-second alternatives to their frontier models.
Half kidding feature request for HN: Mark all AI related posts so I can filter them out, when I need a pause.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Reuters has been reporting that Chinese government is undergoing similar investigation to the US; blocking the export of domestic frontier models. They boil down to "anonymous sources" but it does seem inevitable as the tech gets stronger and stronger.
It came (at least in part) from a document in May where the CCP pretty much said that they will need to review models to make sure they don't threaten national security. Which basically translates too "Don't give away tools that can be used to undermine your own goals".
- Started the speech by referring to his signature maxim, "great changes unseen in a century are unfolding across the world"
- Said that the world has "entered an unprecedented period of active innovation on AI technology", which means "great opportunities as well as challenges for governance”
- reaffirmed commitment to open source to promote AI "openness and win-win"
- warns against "over stretching" the concept of national security as applied to AI where one country's national security is prioritised over others
- China opposes emergence of “new historical injustices” in AI (one of the most strongly worded parts of the speech)
- China in next 5 years will provide 5000 opportunities to developing countries in "AI training and seminar programmes" and "cooperation centres" - names ASEAN, League of Arab States, African Union, CELAC, SCO and BRICS
Live blog: https://www.scmp.com/tech/policy/article/3360858/chinas-xi-j...
Complete translation: https://x.com/i/status/2077984062933762450
> Kimi K3 is Kimi’s most capable model to date, with 2.8 trillion parameters. This puts them on the top of the largest open models list: Kimi K3 2.8T DeepSeek-V4-Pro 1.6T (49B active) Kimi K2.6 ~1T (32B active) GLM-5.2 754B (40B active) DeepSeek-V3.2 685B Mistral Large 3 675B That's one mighty large model! Moonshot is going to need the USD 500 million reportedly raised earlier this year to run this model.