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

Moonshot AI suspends new subscriptions due to Kimi K3 demand

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 118 posts

Re: Moonshot AI suspends new subscriptions due to Kimi K3 demand

#81

Post by shiandow »

jgalt212 wrote: post #47
Alifatisk wrote: post #19

> Over the past 48 hours, demand has pushed close to the limits of our current capacity. To protect the experience of existing subscribers, we're temporarily pausing new subscriptions and prioritizing compute for current members. Existing subscribed users are not affected. Such a beautiful paragraph to read, a company that prioritizes their current customers and focus on keeping them satisfied instead of just focusin…

So this is what Hetzner should have done instead of raising prices to calibrate supply and demand?

Seems like a different problem. You can't offer hardware at a price you can't buy new hardware with, so there isn't much of a choice there. But pricing away existing customers simply to lower demand is a bold move, especially if you could simply solve the supply issue instead.

Re: Moonshot AI suspends new subscriptions due to Kimi K3 demand

#82

Post by throwaway7783 »

kasey_junk wrote: post #71
kamranjon wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I am likely coming from a completely different world because I use entirely self hosted models - but is it really common in your workflows to just wait for 12 minutes without any feedback? I am constantly watching my model and following the path it’s taking and cutting it off or steering it if it’s headed down a dead path. I was just curious if this is really common to just have no feedback for 12 minutes?

I have workflows that run for 8-10 hours unattended regularly. This is on frontier models though. But if I were to look in on them they’d be giving feedback during that time, but they wouldn’t need steering.

What do these workflows do? I can't think of anything that needs to run for so long.

Re: Moonshot AI suspends new subscriptions due to Kimi K3 demand

#83

Post by kasey_junk »

throwaway7783 wrote: post #82
kasey_junk wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have workflows that run for 8-10 hours unattended regularly. This is on frontier models though. But if I were to look in on them they’d be giving feedback during that time, but they wouldn’t need steering.

What do these workflows do? I can't think of anything that needs to run for so long.

Pretty straight ahead coding workflows. Most of my operational workflows are much simpler (because diagnosing an operational issue is much more time sensitive obviously).

Re: Moonshot AI suspends new subscriptions due to Kimi K3 demand

#84

Post by adam_arthur »

roncesvalles wrote: post #70
kamranjon wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I am likely coming from a completely different world because I use entirely self hosted models - but is it really common in your workflows to just wait for 12 minutes without any feedback? I am constantly watching my model and following the path it’s taking and cutting it off or steering it if it’s headed down a dead path. I was just curious if this is really common to just have no feedback for 12 minutes?

Usually, the longer the AI works on something the crappier its output because that means the context is getting filled up. If my AI prompt takes more than 5 minutes to execute, I'm almost certain to stop it and break up the task or be more specific about what files it should look at or what subtask it should tackle first. The people who let it run for hours are absolutely not getting anything worth keeping in the end…

Exactly.

I've found 6 minutes or so the sweet spot for upper bound with 5.6 Sol.

And it sounds like the OPs query above requires scanning throughout a large portion of the codebase, which will inherently consume a large number of input tokens. No locality to it.

Re: Moonshot AI suspends new subscriptions due to Kimi K3 demand

#85

Post by danwitt »

kamranjon wrote: post #52
thevinter wrote: post #15

Personal anecdote: I exhausted my Claude usage yesterday so I decided to spend 20$ to try Kimi while I was at it. Logged in, paid, downloaded Kimi Code, set it to use K3 and prompted something along the lines of: "Check this repository and find all the settings that can be passed as input related to hardware, I/O, thread control or networking. Produce a report". It thought for about 12 minutes and then told me I had…

So I am likely coming from a completely different world because I use entirely self hosted models - but is it really common in your workflows to just wait for 12 minutes without any feedback? I am constantly watching my model and following the path it’s taking and cutting it off or steering it if it’s headed down a dead path. I was just curious if this is really common to just have no feedback for 12 minutes?

K3 is relatively slow, but 12 minutes points to the harness not the model IMO.

Re: Moonshot AI suspends new subscriptions due to Kimi K3 demand

#86

Post by Curtis_Guan »

Early in the morning on the day Kimi K3 was released, I tried using Multi-Agent to execute a relatively complex research report. The whole process took five hours, involved 12 roles, and ultimately produced a 54,000-word report. I read through it carefully, and my feeling is that it could directly serve as an outline for a book or a documentary. I also observed the writing process—especially the repeated verification of potentially inaccurate data sources, as well as the reminders and adjustment suggestions regarding certain platforms. In short, I am very satisfied with this report, and I will use it as a reference for the subsequent documentary.

Re: Moonshot AI suspends new subscriptions due to Kimi K3 demand

#87

Post by AussieWog93 »

roncesvalles wrote: post #70
kamranjon wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I am likely coming from a completely different world because I use entirely self hosted models - but is it really common in your workflows to just wait for 12 minutes without any feedback? I am constantly watching my model and following the path it’s taking and cutting it off or steering it if it’s headed down a dead path. I was just curious if this is really common to just have no feedback for 12 minutes?

Usually, the longer the AI works on something the crappier its output because that means the context is getting filled up. If my AI prompt takes more than 5 minutes to execute, I'm almost certain to stop it and break up the task or be more specific about what files it should look at or what subtask it should tackle first. The people who let it run for hours are absolutely not getting anything worth keeping in the end…

>Usually, the longer the AI works on something the crappier its output because that means the context is getting filled up.

This was definitely truer with older models but isn't necessarily the case now.

They frequently do other things apart from navel-gazing that take a lot of time but get good results, like spinning up subagents to solve some hairy task in a loop.

Stopping/distrusting long-running AIs is a habit I've had to unlearn myself.

I frequently get good results from a 30+ minute Fable session, when I've asked it to do something complex (e.g. run the QA tester in a loop and eliminate all crashes, one commit per crash fixed)

Re: Moonshot AI suspends new subscriptions due to Kimi K3 demand

#88

Post by SyneRyder »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #87
roncesvalles wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually, the longer the AI works on something the crappier its output because that means the context is getting filled up. If my AI prompt takes more than 5 minutes to execute, I'm almost certain to stop it and break up the task or be more specific about what files it should look at or what subtask it should tackle first. The people who let it run for hours are absolutely not getting anything worth keeping in the end…

>Usually, the longer the AI works on something the crappier its output because that means the context is getting filled up. This was definitely truer with older models but isn't necessarily the case now. They frequently do other things apart from navel-gazing that take a lot of time but get good results, like spinning up subagents to solve some hairy task in a loop. Stopping/distrusting long-running AIs is a habit I'…

This is my experience as well. Lots of success with running one hour Fable sessions (one hour of API time). Not using a loop here, but there's often lots of documentation for Claude to go through first before building out the project.

The main failure point for me with long running Fable sessions now is just that it might hit a safety guardrail and downgrade to Opus midway.

Re: Moonshot AI suspends new subscriptions due to Kimi K3 demand

#89

Post by ryandrake »

kasey_junk wrote: post #83
throwaway7783 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do these workflows do? I can't think of anything that needs to run for so long.

Pretty straight ahead coding workflows. Most of my operational workflows are much simpler (because diagnosing an operational issue is much more time sensitive obviously).

As a casual AI code user, I can’t even go 30 seconds without claude grinding to a halt asking for permission to run a bash script for the 10th time.

Re: Moonshot AI suspends new subscriptions due to Kimi K3 demand

#90

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

wingworks wrote: post #69
satvikpendem wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Codex works for this, it'll continue thinking and will answer the prompt even if your limit is reached.

I feel like this is the right way to do it. Especially if you're using your own credits. Unless it's obnoxiously long task. So often it'll cut off just as it's about to finish.

Buys $10 worth of credits.

> Codex, translate the entire PostgreSQL codebase to idiomatic Rust, make no mistakes.

Post reply on HN