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

Kimi-K3 Technical Report [pdf]

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 199 posts

Re: Kimi-K3 Technical Report [pdf]

#61

Post by lossolo »

simonw wrote: post #33
fahrradflucht wrote: post #8

License: https://huggingface.co/moonshotai/Kimi-K3/blob/main/LICENSE > If the Licensee or any of its affiliates operates a Model as a Service business, and the aggregate revenue of the Licensee and its affiliates exceeds 20 million US dollars (or the equivalent in other currencies) in total over any consecutive 12 months, the Licensee must enter into a separate agreement with Moonshot AI before using the Software or…

Kimi 2.6 had the same janky license: https://huggingface.co/moonshotai/Kimi-K2.6/blob/main/LICENS... - looks like they've been doing that at least as far back as K2. The models they released in 2025 - https://huggingface.co/moonshotai/models - were clean MIT. They started doing the "modified MIT" thing in January 2026 with moonshotai/Kimi-K2-Thinking

In what way was the license "janky"? Moonshot isn't a trillion dollar US behemoth. If these terms allow it to release near frontier models with open weights, so startups and anyone with enough hardware can use them, while charging only companies with more than $20 million in revenue or 100 million users, that seems like a reasonable trade off.

Re: Kimi-K3 Technical Report [pdf]

#63

Post by oxzidized »

m_ke wrote: post #59
Almondsetat wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should I waste time parsing content and not tone? Why can't the commenter just avoid the tone? It even saves time since you can write less!

[flagged]

> because it gets people like you going

So you're admiting you were trolling?

Re: Kimi-K3 Technical Report [pdf]

#64

Post by Smaug123 »

ike_a wrote: post #9
jvanderbot wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment would be much better without the second line

I'm not sure I understand the case for open-source models being decelerationist, is this it? Decel: - Potentially reduces investor appetite for funding big labs. - More risk of powerful AI getting in bad hands -> more regulation. Accel: - More competition so big labs can't rest on laurels. - More research in open, so all labs can accrete advancements faster. I feel like open-source = acceleration has a much more clea…

If your worldview is “most of the progress is made by closed labs, then open labs fast-follow” (which isn’t implausible given the documented distillation of Fable), and further that open labs cannot make make meaningful progress vs the closed labs except by fast-following and that they won’t pick up the ability to make progress after the closed labs are gone, then driving closed labs out of business slows down overall progress.

Re: Kimi-K3 Technical Report [pdf]

#65

Post by SirLordBoss »

jvanderbot wrote: post #6
m_ke wrote: post #5

Also open sourced a bunch of infra to go with it. Anyone who claims open source and open weights models are "decel" needs to get their head checked https://github.com/MoonshotAI/MoonEP https://github.com/kvcache-ai/AgentEnv https://github.com/MoonshotAI/FlashKDA

This comment would be much better without the second line

Why? Absolutely correct, especially considering the position of the person they're referring to

Re: Kimi-K3 Technical Report [pdf]

#66

Post by lossolo »

embedding-shape wrote: post #39
lenerdenator wrote: post #31

What would it take to get an American open model to compete with this?

Latest "big" release from any of the bigger American lab must have been GPT-OSS-120b I think? Released ~summer 2025, so pretty much one years ago. Doesn't seem like it'll happen by itself, so something either forcing their hand figuratively, or something forcing their hand literally. Personally I was wishing/hoping for one of the recent Gemma releases to be in the ~100B class at least, but sadly Google is keeping tha…

Yeah, besides that, the only big other open source US model that was worth looking at was Inkling (975B params), Jul 15, 2026.

https://thinkingmachines.ai/news/introducing-inkling/

Re: Kimi-K3 Technical Report [pdf]

#67

Post by vanuatu »

m_ke wrote: post #5

Also open sourced a bunch of infra to go with it. Anyone who claims open source and open weights models are "decel" needs to get their head checked https://github.com/MoonshotAI/MoonEP https://github.com/kvcache-ai/AgentEnv https://github.com/MoonshotAI/FlashKDA

To me its clear that it is decel

the only reason other labs can catch up is because the frontier labs can be distilled, and they siphon a % of the labs' revenue to reinvest into the next iteration

full accel would mean nationalizing the big 2 labs and locking in manhattan project style until RSI

(Edit: some great counterpoints in the replies. my view has definitely been changed!)

Re: Kimi-K3 Technical Report [pdf]

#69

Post by reckless »

GodelNumbering wrote: post #60

Back of the envelope calculation (could be off, correct me if I am) If you are a large enough company that spends million+ on inference a month, it makes sense to buy a GB300 rack ($6M on top range from what I could find) which has 20.7 TB. Since the model is mixed trained (MXFP4), you would need less than 10% of the rack's memory to serve the full model. Aggregate HBM bandwidth: 576 TB/s. You can run over 6000 paral…

I think the licensing that would likely apply to a company that's able to afford ~$6M rack and the associated infrastructure muddies this somewhat

Re: Kimi-K3 Technical Report [pdf]

#70

Post by 999900000999 »

GodelNumbering wrote: post #60

Back of the envelope calculation (could be off, correct me if I am) If you are a large enough company that spends million+ on inference a month, it makes sense to buy a GB300 rack ($6M on top range from what I could find) which has 20.7 TB. Since the model is mixed trained (MXFP4), you would need less than 10% of the rack's memory to serve the full model. Aggregate HBM bandwidth: 576 TB/s. You can run over 6000 paral…

And hire 2 or 3 dev ops to keep it running ?

That another 400 to 700k.

It becomes your problem and not someone else’s. However, I don’t trust hosted LLMs for anything that needs to be private.

Post reply on HN