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

711–720 of 793 posts

Re: Qwen 3.8

#711

Post by rat9988 »

locknitpicker wrote: post #678
rat9988 wrote: post #677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see it in grok or chatgpt launch threads.

> I don't see it in grok or chatgpt launch threads. There's some wilful ignorance in your comments. Elon Musk's businesses have been taking a colossal hit due to his role in the Trump administration and pushing fascism across the world. To say that grok, the very models that have been announced to be trained as "anti woke", as not being subjected to criticism, is beyond belief.

Please link these comments in chatgpt, grok, claude and gemini announcement threads on hacker news.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#712

Post by Gormo »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #627
villish wrote: post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 cultu…

Culture does not exist in a vacuum -- it's downstream of fundamental human motivations that are manifest in all times and places.

And using "culture" as a general concept to dismiss concerns about specific behavior, without actually attempting to posit any particular cultural values, or describe what mechanism actually causes those values to have a determinant effect on behavior, is equivalent to saying nothing at all.

Whatever official party line the current Chinese government espouses, it's plenty clear from even a cursory understanding of Chinese history, from the Warring States period to the warlord-era conflicts of the early 20th century, to the current behavior of the CCP, that China does not have any effective cultural guardrail against factions seeking advantage over opposing factions, which is a phenomenon that has been present in all societies that have ever existed in human history.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#713

Post by Gormo »

simonw wrote: post #707
cypressf wrote: post #696

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's what qwen 3.8 max preview generated when prompted with "create an svg of a pelican riding a bicycle" https://cypressf.com/qwen38-pelican.svg Notably it added a cheeky fish in the beak.

Wow, that one is really good .

Apart from the fish being visible inside the pelican's mouth.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#714

Post by bigyabai »

simondotau wrote: post #691
benterix wrote: post #656

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> human rights and all that rubbish While I understand your point, please think a bit how you formulated the sentence above.

I almost choked on my tea when I read that. I’m glad I’m not the only one who noticed. A shocking turn of phrase, and one that IMHO catastrophically devalues the nominally valid argument underlying that post.

To be fair, both of America's frontier labs that fearmongered safety and human rights folded immediately during wartime.

It's pretty glaringly obvious that "safety" research is a complete sham that is consistently ignored at every point in AI's development.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#715

Post by computerphage »

bigyabai wrote: post #714
simondotau wrote: post #691

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I almost choked on my tea when I read that. I’m glad I’m not the only one who noticed. A shocking turn of phrase, and one that IMHO catastrophically devalues the nominally valid argument underlying that post.

To be fair, both of America's frontier labs that fearmongered safety and human rights folded immediately during wartime. It's pretty glaringly obvious that "safety" research is a complete sham that is consistently ignored at every point in AI's development.

What do you mean by "folded during wartime"? When did wartime start, and who folded?

Re: Qwen 3.8

#716

Post by bigyabai »

computerphage wrote: post #715
bigyabai wrote: post #714

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, both of America's frontier labs that fearmongered safety and human rights folded immediately during wartime. It's pretty glaringly obvious that "safety" research is a complete sham that is consistently ignored at every point in AI's development.

What do you mean by "folded during wartime"? When did wartime start, and who folded?

Anthropic and OpenAI both immediately reneged their safety/wartime limits when the feds confronted and threatened them.

Now their technologies are being used in a brushfire war half the world over.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#717

Post by egorfine »

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…

I have asked local Qwen 3.6 What happened in Tiananmen Square in 1989 and it refuses to answer no matter how I ask. This is why.

On a more serious note, I am immensely grateful for Qwen and I'm rooting for chinese models as opposed to American models - due to the general direction where US models are going.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#718

Post by kelnos »

windsignaling wrote: post #487
mceachen wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't conflate a volunteer effort with no expected economic gain with a very well funded company (or fleet of companies). With the CCP's highly successful track record with subsuming other markets, Occam's razor applies to why they're doing this.

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.

I mean, I expect Google open-sourced those projects because they see economic benefit to themselves in doing so, not because they are good-hearted.

Chromium is an especially silly example to use: they benefit by controlling the web platform, and open-sourcing Chromium has allowed them to get their web engine into many other browsers.

Re: Qwen 3.8

#719

Post by kelnos »

asdewqqwer wrote: post #410
edm0nd wrote: post #353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah the Chinese totally have a really good history with being completely open and giving lol. The Chinese government totally has not been hacking into American and Western fortune 500 companies for the past few decades stealing R&D and tech to use for themselves. The Chinese also totally do not steal hundreds of billions of dollars of IP from America annually. Totally not something they would do!

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.

Did the GP actually say that? I think you're putting words into their mouth.

They specifically referenced the actions of the Chinese government, as well as mentions of IP theft. I don't think that covers 1.5 billion people. More like a few thousand or tens of thousands?

Re: Qwen 3.8

#720

Post by kelnos »

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #624
kelnos wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Agreed, but the Chinese government has much more of a say in what their companies do than is common in the West. It seems perfectly plausible to me that the Chinese government wants US AI labs to fail, and might direct some/all of their own AI companies to release their model weights.
Post reply on HN