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

Qwen 3.8

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 793 posts

Re: Qwen 3.8

#251

Post by 5701652400 »

amelius wrote: post #238
chewz wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From my experience Qwen-3.7-Max is above the Opus level but delivers results much faster. Slightly worse then Fable. Way ahead of Deepseek 4 Pro (in speed and overall comprehension) - which is a workhorse on its own. I am using them all with Claude Code mostly. Qwen-3.7-Plus is quite OK, good for subagent use. Way better then Sonnet. Qwen-3.8-Max-Preview seems working just fine for me at the moment - I am playing wit…

Can we please include information of what languages we use when making claims like these? It makes a huge difference if you're writing Javascript/HTML/CSS, Python, or C++/Rust. Also the application type matters, e.g. user interfaces or scientific computing.

me: Go, Swift, Kotlin, bash k8s/gcloud

domain: typical web backend tier, mobile apps. not particularly complex, but requires OOP/architecture/system design.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#252

Post by corv »

Who is behind this site? Is this another frontend to Alibaba or a reseller in Singapore?

Re: Qwen 3.8

#253

Post by [deleted] »

leereeves wrote: post #235
traceroute66 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know, omitting anything about Tiananmen Square, China's genocides against Uyghurs and Tibetans, or including texts propagandizing for the "reunification" (aka, annexation) of Taiwan. I am not Chinese and I'm not defending the Chinese, but I see this argument come up a lot. The hard reality is that what you say is simply not going to affect 99.9999999999% of users. Is it realistically going to affect anyone usin…

> The US does not exactly have an entirely pristine history either. Shall we discuss the post-9-11 related infrastructure of Guantanamo Bay ? Or the "Detention and Interrogation Program" that included a network of clandestine extrajudicial detention centres, officially known as "black sites"[1]? Linking a US website discussing the topic doesn't exactly support your point.

[deleted]

Re: Qwen 3.8

#254

Post by traceroute66 »

leereeves wrote: post #235
traceroute66 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You know, omitting anything about Tiananmen Square, China's genocides against Uyghurs and Tibetans, or including texts propagandizing for the "reunification" (aka, annexation) of Taiwan. I am not Chinese and I'm not defending the Chinese, but I see this argument come up a lot. The hard reality is that what you say is simply not going to affect 99.9999999999% of users. Is it realistically going to affect anyone usin…

> The US does not exactly have an entirely pristine history either. Shall we discuss the post-9-11 related infrastructure of Guantanamo Bay ? Or the "Detention and Interrogation Program" that included a network of clandestine extrajudicial detention centres, officially known as "black sites"[1]? Linking a US website discussing the topic doesn't exactly support your point.

> Linking a US website discussing the topic doesn't exactly support your point.

It supports my point precisely. Recall I also said "Does anyone seriously use LLMs for researching politically sensitive matters ? No.".

Just as there is plenty of information out there on the US's less than perfect history, there is also plenty of information out there on the various Chinese politically sensitive matters. You do not need a Chinese LLM to find out about it, all you need is a search engine.

The point is you have an open-weights LLM that is very good for a vast number of non-political uses, such as coding.

The point is that you can use the open-weights model instead of paying through the nose for a US model where they harvest your data unless you have an "enterprise" zero-data retention "trust me dude" clause that you have no viable way of verifying – and which incidentally is still subject to the good old "law, or court or administrative order" contract clauses, so it may not be as much of a zero-data retention as you think it is.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#255

Post by tclancy »

ahartmetz wrote: post #214
xyzsparetimexyz wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its the currency of the future.

Since Euro and Dollar values are reasonably close, you can call both of them credits, maybe

Yes, but credits are money you don’t actually own. So much more convenient, wave of the future and all that.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#256

Post by JKCalhoun »

gardnr wrote: post #6
adrian_b wrote: post #4

I assume that this announcement has been prompted by that of Moonshot AI, which has just announced a 2.8T parameter open-weights LLM, Kimi K3, to be published on Huggingface by 27 July. Now the response of Alibaba is that they will also publish soon a big open weights LLM, the 2.4T parameter Qwen 3.8. I wonder if Alibaba has always planned to make this big LLM open weights, or they have chosen to do this now, to bett…

It's hard to say what their motivation is. The Chinese firms seem to be working hard to commoditize intelligence which may be the most effective way to debase American frontier labs. And yeah: it also happens to be really good for humanity.

Xi Pitches China as Leader of New Global AI Order, Challenging US Dominance:

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/chinas-xi-promote...

Re: Qwen 3.8

#257

Post by fittingopposite »

adrian_b wrote: post #4

I assume that this announcement has been prompted by that of Moonshot AI, which has just announced a 2.8T parameter open-weights LLM, Kimi K3, to be published on Huggingface by 27 July. Now the response of Alibaba is that they will also publish soon a big open weights LLM, the 2.4T parameter Qwen 3.8. I wonder if Alibaba has always planned to make this big LLM open weights, or they have chosen to do this now, to bett…

Wondering how much the operations in China are orchestrated by the central government vs. free competition. Anyone with more insights on this?

Re: Qwen 3.8

#258

Post by adrian_b »

smnplk wrote: post #148

Do this giant open-weight models have less active params and could be run on consumer hardware or no ?

Any open-weights model that has ever been published can be run on consumer hardware, even on a mini-PC.

The right question is which is the speed that can be achieved on a given hardware and whether it is high enough for the model to be useful.

Until now, the speeds reported for running big LLMs with the weights stored on SSDs have ranged from as low as a token every 10 seconds or so, to as high as a few tokens per second.

With open weights models that you host yourself, you are not constrained to use any single model, because that is the one for which you pay a subscription.

You can use many models, each for whatever it is more suitable. You can use frequently a small model with a high inference speed, but for some tasks you may actually save time with a better model, even if it is much slower.

In my opinion, even at 1 token per second a big model may be useful for some tasks.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#259

Post by pianopatrick »

gardnr wrote: post #6
adrian_b wrote: post #4

I assume that this announcement has been prompted by that of Moonshot AI, which has just announced a 2.8T parameter open-weights LLM, Kimi K3, to be published on Huggingface by 27 July. Now the response of Alibaba is that they will also publish soon a big open weights LLM, the 2.4T parameter Qwen 3.8. I wonder if Alibaba has always planned to make this big LLM open weights, or they have chosen to do this now, to bett…

It's hard to say what their motivation is. The Chinese firms seem to be working hard to commoditize intelligence which may be the most effective way to debase American frontier labs. And yeah: it also happens to be really good for humanity.

The Chinese firms may just be making a bad business decision.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#260

Post by DanielHB »

rikima_ wrote: post #231
DanielHB wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fear is not about the models open weights it is the erosion of training capability in other countries. Why train models when they do it for free? Until they don't of course, or they start doing what the US is doing right now by locking out some models to government only or internal market only. What people should be afraid is the rug pull.

So either you openweight it, or not. Neither is good for other countries, according to this logic.

Ideally there would be open weight models from multiple geopolitical areas. It is not that different from telecom really, you don't want the whole world to be dependent on a single provider from a single country on this kind of stuff.
Post reply on HN