Live data from Hacker News

The Kimi K3 Moment

stephen.bochinski.dev

51–60 of 644 posts

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#52

> I’ve been running Kimi K3 alongside Claude on my normal coding work, and for all practical purposes I can’t tell them apart When you say "Claude", do you mean Opus? Fable? What effort level?

This is comparing Fable High with K3 High. I'm mostly using these models for game development. The tasks I usually send are ambiguous visual bugs, changing the look of a scene or models, or adding a large feature. The wording wasn't accurate there. I don't use Fable or K3 most of the time. I'm usually working on smaller scoped tasks that I review myself afterwards.

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#53

[flagged]

Doesn't read like AI writing whatsoever.

I don't know. You can't just rely on looking for em dashes or other obvious tells because anyone who cares can get the AI to avoid those.

> When the headline model on your plan can be switched off because the economics don’t work, the plan was never really selling you the headline model. Kimi’s tiers don’t come with that asterisk.

This line has a certain smug, punchy cleverness that I associate with AI. To me, the vibes are ~30% AI writing.

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#54
I never truly understood what the intended business model around LLMs was. Get them widespread through cheap pricing and then jacking it up? Being the only ones that had a viable product so to get the ability to extract as much value as you want from AI?

I don't understand how a product that:

- is interfaced with and is deeply linked to natural language, so everything you produce (sessions, history, etc) is in Markdown and you can literally install a second model and tell it "hey import all of Claude's memory into yours" and that's it

- is based on well understood technology, the real constraints are how much money you put into training the models, but the theory has all been developed in the open

- clearly has a threshold where it quickly commoditises and turns from "I want the best" to "hey the best is a bit too expensive. The second best is half the price and works close enough".

was ever supposed to be a money printing machine. The fact something is extremely useful doesn't imply it's extremely profitable.

IMHO we're clearly speedrunning the process of turning AI into a commodity. Dario Amodei knows pretty well that when or if Anthropic cuts people off Fable, the vast majority of them will definitely not pay for it because Opus 4.8 is good enough for almost everybody that _knows_ what they're doing, and so are basically half of the most recent models. If I already have good baking skills I don't become more productive with an automatic bread machine, I just need a better dough mixer and oven

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#56
post #8

I tried Kimi K3 on a task I've done with every other model I use regularly ( https://swelljoe.com/post/i-let-every-agent-implement-its-ow... ) and found it chewed a lot longer on the problem and ate up almost the entirety of a 5 hour usage limit on their $19 plan. I only have the $20 plan from OpenAI and the same task, with a lot of the same implementation details as Kimi Code, only took a few minutes and consumed al…

OpenAI measures token efficiency. Look at the API cost charts in their announcement: https://openai.com/index/gpt-5-6/

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#57

Regardless of whether they achieved parity via distillation, or whether they got here via independently constructing a model from scratch, it was always going to end this way for the frontier American labs. Distillation “attacks” are not attacks. The frontier labs “distilled” all existing human written knowledge into their models, there was always going to be a second class lab that would distill that model into a ch…

> Distillation “attacks” are not attacks. If "distillation attacks" happen, we have to conclude there is some value add in what model labs do. Regardless of how we feel about using existing human knowledge in the way they currently do, it's simply impractical to infer that everything that happens downstream of LLMs can not be an attack on some IP because of it. So both things can be true: a) People infringe on Anthro…

Regardless of whether it’s intellectual property or it isn’t intellectual property, it doesn’t actually matter. If AI doesn’t stop seeing diminishing returns in scaling up, and it hasn’t yet in the 10 years since the attention/transformers paper, the advent of AI will be the most important development in the history of humanity. Controlling that machine, or at least having one of your own, is an existential problem for nation states. It’s like a matter of national defense.

Do you really think intellectual property laws will prevent this in practice? It’s like as if we said, “hey, USSR, you can’t make a nuke, too! We patented that already.”

Asking China to not distill our models down is equally as ridiculous.

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#59

Regardless of whether they achieved parity via distillation, or whether they got here via independently constructing a model from scratch, it was always going to end this way for the frontier American labs. Distillation “attacks” are not attacks. The frontier labs “distilled” all existing human written knowledge into their models, there was always going to be a second class lab that would distill that model into a ch…

assume you are a "second class lab" and you are in fact making progress by distilling the results of the frontier labs' efforts.

what is the end game for this strategy?

if the frontier labs shut down, or stop releasing to the public, and there's noting left to distill, how will you progress?

Re: The Kimi K3 Moment

#60

Regardless of whether they achieved parity via distillation, or whether they got here via independently constructing a model from scratch, it was always going to end this way for the frontier American labs. Distillation “attacks” are not attacks. The frontier labs “distilled” all existing human written knowledge into their models, there was always going to be a second class lab that would distill that model into a ch…

> Distillation “attacks” are not attacks. If "distillation attacks" happen, we have to conclude there is some value add in what model labs do. Regardless of how we feel about using existing human knowledge in the way they currently do, it's simply impractical to infer that everything that happens downstream of LLMs can not be an attack on some IP because of it. So both things can be true: a) People infringe on Anthro…

>People infringe on Anthropics IP

No.

Authors do not infringe on IP when they read another's book, nor should the lumber company be able to dictate how I use planks and if I can resell them if i'm done with them.

You're framing it as if the added value of the author or lumber company, awards them consideration when somebody uses the products to create more value.

IP law was always a big mess, and these questions cross far into ideology instead of law; but I do not understand people who think we need an ideology where more IP-law is good for society.

Post reply on HN