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

Qwen3.8-Max: A New Bar for Coding and Cowork

qwen.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 653 posts

Re: Qwen3.8-Max: A New Bar for Coding and Cowork

#311

Post by victorbjorklund »

rzerowan wrote: post #232
Fordec wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if the US does ban it, Europe due to its lack of European competitors, has no current similar protectionist incentives. Even if there is regulatory capture in the US, the rest of the world isn't going to follow suit until the current market leaders outright are replaced with other competitors that Europe would want to favor. The genie is out of the bottle in the West already.

Theres a pretty big chance imho that europe will follow suit , or at least the segmenets that are fully aligned with the US on all things china even to their own detriment. Remeber rip and replace Huawei 5G because of national security , leading to some parts of europe having worse coverage than some tiny african markets. Best bet would be for europe to look at it like what it is an open source commodity that is usef…

Doubt it now when US declared that Europe is an enemy, Europe is banned from the best models and that US is considering an invasion of Europe (Greenland). The days of US influence in Europe is limited.

Re: Qwen3.8-Max: A New Bar for Coding and Cowork

#312

Post by seanmcdirmid »

victorbjorklund wrote: post #309
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is really a rosy image of China’s electrify situation. They have huge needs in the east and green energy in the west, they can’t build their UHV links fast enough. They are doing ok at keeping up, but there isn’t a surplus of cheap electricity lying around in the same places where you have cheap water as well.

What is stopping them from just building their data centers in the west where they have energy surplus? Not like you need to locate a data center inside a city.

Water. The west is really dry. We could throw in data lines as well but it’s really bottlenecked by water. Actually the only place in China with water in abundance is southeast China.

Also they really don’t have the chips to supply those data centers, and the government isn’t so crazy to go that aggressive on AI, they have lots of other priorities as well.

Re: Qwen3.8-Max: A New Bar for Coding and Cowork

#313

Post by adornKey »

websap wrote: post #287
vrganj wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you're anti-AI because you're really anti-outsourcing your thinking to some remote corporation you don't control? That's one of my main issues with AI anyways, the thought of having all my data go through some sketchy foreign (to me) entity with questionable motives and under a questionable regime. Local AI solves for all of those.

I'm not against AI. I'm calling out the hypocrisy in the comment. I'm anti-AI, but will spend hours trying to setup a local model, instead of just getting access to frontier intelligence in 15 mins, and actually getting useful work done. If you're learning about model inference, then it's a different and you are definitely not anti-AI in that case.

I think learning how to set up a local AI now requires less time than learning about potential pitfalls of token-plans and processing payments in corporate environments.

It's not that billing is complicated, but learning to set up a local AI is a lot more useful and more rewarding.

Re: Qwen3.8-Max: A New Bar for Coding and Cowork

#314

Post by ryanjshaw »

me551ah wrote: post #257

This makes me wonder if AI companies even have a MOAT in the first place. All requests to an LLM are idempotent, for every API call you need to send it the entire conversation history so that it can process it. LLMs do not learn or remember anything, which makes it super easy for users to switch LLMs on the fly. Most popular AI frameworks, make this a one-liner change these days. And that makes me wonder if the trill…

> Cause if that is justified, then Kimi, Qwen, Deepseek etc are also valued at a trillion dollars

It’s more like a bunch of people are placing different bets. Only a few bets are going to generate a return, possibly only one, but the profit on that one bet will make it all worthwhile. That’s the theory, anyway.

Re: Qwen3.8-Max: A New Bar for Coding and Cowork

#315

Post by victorbjorklund »

Fordec wrote: post #192
gilgoomesh wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> lack of European competitors There's Mistral. Although they've been surprisingly quiet for the last 6 months.

France might do something mad and take that route, but EU wide ain't happening for Mistrals sake.

Would be hard for them to act alone due to free movement in EU. Would be hard for them to outlaw a German business from offering the models from a German datacenter to French customers.

Re: Qwen3.8-Max: A New Bar for Coding and Cowork

#317

Post by victorbjorklund »

akmarinov wrote: post #156
CamperBob2 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Level 1: Anyone using unauthorized model weights in their business is prohibited from doing business with the government... Level 2: ... or with anyone who does. Level 3: Anyone caught with unauthorized model weights is subject to the same prosecution they could expect if they had been caught with CSAM.

Cool - how are they going to detect/police that?

Same way they detect if you do business with Russia, North Korea, Iran. They don’t detect 100% of the cases but the punishment are severe enough to deter most companies.

Re: Qwen3.8-Max: A New Bar for Coding and Cowork

#318

Post by regularfry »

me551ah wrote: post #303
regularfry wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With their current API approach they're essentially a commodity. They need to start moving parts of the harness behind the API, otherwise they'll remain a commodity. Recursive self-improvement changes the parameters a bit, especially for the market-leaders, and it's the one thing that makes me wonder if they'll be able to extend their lead faster than the smaller labs can keep up, but it's an option available to ever…

> They need to start moving parts of the harness behind the API This isn't without it's challenges however. 1. This will increase costs drastically, since they would need to a run a sandbox per use to ensure data isolation. 2. Increased latency, and this directly limits how much of the harness can be moved to the cloud before the users notice sluggishness

Oh, I'm sure. If it wasn't a bit of a tricky needle to thread we'd have seen them start to do it already.
Post reply on HN