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

621–630 of 793 posts

Re: Qwen 3.8

#621

Post by regularfry »

dofm wrote: post #206
regularfry wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Worth knowing that Unsloth have just put out another Gemma 4 release from Google's upstream updates which should improve reliability. Bugs in the chat template affecting tool calling and other issues, apparently. https://www.reddit.com/r/unsloth/s/MpC6Hzs4Wj

Wow, thanks. I didn't see Unsloth had already done their version; I was just about to go back to the google version to test this change.

Yeah, it's only a chat template change. So if you don't fancy re-downloading the whole model and can just hack the new chat template into your process, it's a lightweight test to do.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#622

Post by vkou »

1over137 wrote: post #613
vkou wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but that mousetrap keeps working for SV startups, what makes you think it won't work for Chinese ones? Uber spent a decade undermining taxis, and once it had market share, it stopped giving away rides and raised prices. It now costs more than a regular taxi, with the quality of the ride being... At best proportionate to the premium in price.

Uber costs more than regular taxi? In what country/region? Not where I am.

Looking at a 7 mile trip to a random destination in Seattle, right now, I can pay $26.70 for an Uber if I'm willing to wait 20 minutes for a pickup. With a $3/mile fee and a $5 pickup fee, that's exactly equal to that of a taxi.

If I'm not willing to wait 20 minutes, I'll be paying an extra $5 minimum.

These rates also go up during busy times.

Looking at Lyft, that same trip is $29, without a wait.

A trip from downtown to SeaTac is $61. Yellow Cab does that same trip for $40.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#623

Post by d5lt5 »

thegrim33 wrote: post #526
windsignaling wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is clearly an anti-China bias here. Show me comments demonstrating the same level of distrust against Google for open-sourcing projects like Tensorflow, Kubernetes, Flutter, Chromium, etc.

Scroll the front page. Find literally any story that has to do with a major US tech company. Open the comment section. Look at the the top comment. It will be negative. Most of the other top comments as well. Trying to gaslight us into not believing our own eyes ..

* "Claude Code uses Bun written in Rust now"

"Drilling into the original article where Jarred explained the reasoning behind the change, It's pretty clear that under zig the team was doing things by hand that are automatic in rust."

* Claude Fable produced a counterexample to the Jacobian Conjecture

"This is a rare instance where feeding this groundbreaking information into an LLM gives _them_ psychosis. I fed this to claude code and watched it verify the result in 7 different ways to be 100% certain, and it was just flabbergasted. Quite remarkable."

* Ollama: All Aboard Open Models

"A year and still no implementation for such a basic need as offloading MoE layers onto the CPU selectively. On llama.cpp I can get models like Qwen 35BA3B running partially on gpu/cpu with 40t/s on a laptop thanks to --n-cpu-moe but on this VC funded joke it would be simply unusable. I can't quite understand how you make a wrapper so much worse than the code you're ripping out."

* Blender 5.2 LTS

"Look at that wow: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gqfLYIJMv7I"

* OpenAI reduces Codex Model Context Size from 372k to 272k

"I know a lot of people like to say that compaction makes this moot, but the level of detail you lose across compaction is wildly too much for most things that I do, unfortunately."

* M-Chips: M7 with up to 1.5 TB – and why Apple is skipping the M6

"I hope they put a better connector than TB5 so we can cluster them properly at 1TB/S"

--

Your math is not mathing.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#624

Post by ClumsyPilot »

kelnos wrote: post #324
gardnr wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> It's hard to say what their motivation is. Feels pretty easy to me. They want to turn LLMs into a commodity, and watch the US AI labs crash and burn. There will still be plenty of customers who will pay them to host the models and run inference, even if the weights are open and others can offer competing products. (If necessary, the Chinese government can ban use of foreign inference services by Chinese citizens an…

> They want to… watch the US AI labs crash and burn.

I don’t think dozens of large independent companies and thousands of researchers are working just to spite Sam Altman. Ad much as I don’t like him, I have other things to do and I am sure so do they.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#627

Post by marcus_holmes »

villish wrote: post #609
bigyabai wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I personally think it is inevitable that China and the US stops producing frontier level open models when they become too valuable. This reads like a paradox, though. If the value of a FOSS model comes from pushing the local frontier, then FOSS releases will be even more attractive in a world with highly capable AI services. The underdog researchers will be motivated to train smaller LLMs that close the gap with th…

> Most people aren't entirely convinced that AI will ever be "too valuable" in the first place. There will be a generational leap that makes current LLMs obsolete in every way. Let's say China gets there first, why would the CCP let it be released publicly? That is an insanely valuable advantage in everything from war fighting to economics and more. Humans for millennia have used technological advances to make better…

> Let's say China gets there first, why would the CCP let it be released publicly? That is an insanely valuable advantage in everything from war fighting to economics and more.

Because China is based in a completely different set of values than the USA. They look at the world differently, and have a different understanding of it.

Your assumption that your attitude is pure human nature is deeply grounded in your culture, which (assuming you are from the USA) is deeply grounded in personal competition rather than co-operation. All that rugged individualism. Other cultures are less based around that, and don't see the world as a zero-sum competition for survival.

I'm no expert in Chinese culture, but there are folks from China on this topic who could probably answer this from their perspective.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#628

Post by sdoering »

cnhwl wrote: post #583

I’m a developer from China. So, is this what Hacker News is all about? Whenever a model comes from China, the comments section stops discussing its technical architecture, optimisation points or real-world performance, and instead starts going on about politics, human rights and all that rubbish? To be honest, we Chinese IT professionals possess a genuine geek spirit. That’s why you’re lagging behind in open-source c…

> human rights and all that rubbish

Denying human rights. Classic. Sorry - you instantly lost any respect I could have maybe had for your opinion.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#629

Post by ClumsyPilot »

WillPostForFood wrote: post #469
asdewqqwer wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is hilarious to see people from arguable the most polarized political systems in the world believing the evil 1.5 billion people across the sea share one single mind, either a saint, or a devil.

It will be a great day for China and the world when the Chinese people are free from a totalitarian dictatorship. But until then we have to speak of the policy of the Chinese government as the policy of China, even if many, or most disagree with those policies.

> we have to speak of the policy of the Chinese government as the policy of China

This does not even have meaning in English.

Policy of US government is not policy of US? When Trump decided to bomb Iran it was just a suggestion?

Re: Qwen 3.8

#630

Post by Maxatar »

tymscar wrote: post #565
benjaminoakes wrote: post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion, simonw shouldn't have to play those games

I find it so strange when someone comments something like this. Nobody thinks this is okay or that Simon should have to play those games. The point of the reply was that while this is stupid, the solution is trivial. I’m genuinely very curious what the point of comments like this is. I am not joking, I want to understand. I see examples like it 50 times a week in random places, and nobody walks me through their menta…

[dead]
Post reply on HN