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

Mistral OCR 4.1

docs.mistral.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 182 posts

Re: Mistral OCR 4.1

#101

Post by ux266478 »

xboxnolifes wrote: post #97
ux266478 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are only 9 countries that have nuclear weapons QED being first didn't grant exclusivity. The premise wasn't that AGI isn't useful. There are actually layers to the metaphor where first-mover advantage of AGI is even less meaningful than it was for nuclear weapons, but I leave those as an exercise to the reader to discover.

Nobody argued exclusivity. But there have been clear advantages to having nukes first.

> Nobody argued exclusivity.

And I quote:

> Imagine a world where only one country has AGI/ASI.

Re: Mistral OCR 4.1

#103

Post by v3ss0n »

fn-mote wrote: post #86
onetwig wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh? Mistral 7b was pioneering in its day and IMO they have been very on top of releasing niche useful models like moderation, OCR, etc. I’m glad Mistral is working on useful solutions. OpenAI/Anthropic is like a retarded little sibling chasing “AGI” and giving up on rich media and other modalities. OpenAI/Anthropic is the worst of the mainstream AI. It goes: 1. Gemini 2. Vidu 3. Le Chat (Mistral) 4. DeepAI 5. [inser…

Totally fake post. Gemini in the top?? For what?

Gemini is best at OCR and document extraction so far. We had tested for insurance needs. None match Gemini even flash level yet.

Re: Mistral OCR 4.1

#104

Post by v3ss0n »

merb wrote: post #31
aliljet wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Accuracy is truly what people die for in the OCR game. Price isn't the primary function here.. it's an equation of price, accuracy, speed, and in mayn cases regulation.

Tbf even with tesseract you already get shit ton of accuracy and you can probably do these 1000 pages for way less than 3.5€. For 3.5€ you can spin up a cloud instance with 8vCPU+32gb on gcloud for 11 hours (or 11 instances for an hour) which can do way more than 1000 pages per hour on tesseract. It takes you around 6 second per page +-4 seconds start/stop depending on what you are doing on that instance size without…

Are you serious? Tasserect is the worst compare to PaddleOCR , Surya/Marker

Re: Mistral OCR 4.1

#105

Post by ux266478 »

fn-mote wrote: post #83
ux266478 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are only 9 countries that have nuclear weapons QED being first didn't grant exclusivity. The premise wasn't that AGI isn't useful. There are actually layers to the metaphor where first-mover advantage of AGI is even less meaningful than it was for nuclear weapons, but I leave those as an exercise to the reader to discover.

> first-mover advantage of AGI is even less meaningful This is your opinion. Lots of tech money appears to disagree. You should at least try to explain your contrarian position, or cite your favorite source that makes an argument that you believe.

> You should at least try to explain your contrarian position

FWIW I explained it fully and provided the argument, along with explicit grounding examples. Can you tell me what exactly you don't understand?

To quote your other post:

> This is the weakest part of the argument. Absolutely no reason to believe the second inventor will be 10x faster.

Nor is there any reason to believe that it will work at any usable speed. An LLM capable of AGI running at 0.000001tok/s isn't a very good head start. Nor is it a good moat if it can't actually realize anything material fast enough. Lord knows America has labor problems.

I'm demonstrating the context is a lot more complicated than "be first". There are innumerable specific examples. They're not guaranteed to happen, that's not the point being made.

Also "no reason" is curious when it's the explicit pattern this exact industry has exhibited. Chinese models lag a few months, and come in swinging with an order of magnitude more efficiency. Does it apply? Who can say. It's certainly on the table. Pretending like it's any more ridiculous than AGI itself is irrational.

> Does this ever happen? Even in traditional manufacturing, the second “inventor” starts behind and has to improve their own process to surpass the first.

To use the industry itself once again: Japan was the first to deep learning. Performance issues prevented them from capitalizing on it. Now they're barely even a player on the field. Interestingly and adjacent to the industry, Japan was second to symbolic AI, and the FGCS was lightyears ahead of America's crufty Lisp ecosystem. For a more modern example, Google was the first to transformers. Much of this revolution is thanks to them. A shame that Gemini is third-rate at best.

It's not unique to this industry. That second inventor more often than not does a better job than the original one. It's a pretty common pattern. Otherwise, we wouldn't need patents.

My "contrarian position" is anything but. There is nothing new under the sun. You don't just need to be first, you need to maintain exclusivity.

Re: Mistral OCR 4.1

#106

Post by usef- »

Oras wrote: post #66
SyneRyder wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I haven't tried OpenAI for OCR, I've put my small scale OCR work through both Claude and Mistral OCR. Claude is absolutely better - even in OCR work I did last week and compared with Mistral OCR 4.0. Mistral's one advantage is that Anthropic now flags OCR, because they don't allow anything that could be considered "reproduction", even of work for which you own the copyright. So my new workflow is Mistral OCR fo…

Same company that OCRed millions of books, the irony. I feel Anthropic is destroying itself with all these restriction. They got away because their models were the best for coding, but that is not an advantage anymore as OpenAI and other open source are already better.

They were criticised/sued early on when people could reproduce copyright things. I dont think in this case it's something they'd prefer to do?

Re: Mistral OCR 4.1

#107

Post by usef- »

kmitz wrote: post #26
ComputerPerson wrote: post #5

I've got a scan from a book that I OCR with new releases. Ligatures, critical sigla, Fraktur letterforms, subscripts, superscripts, etc. Nothing special about this model for overly-detailed work like mine. It's been a while since I last tested (and discontinued my subscription), but the "pro" models from OpenAI dominate. Not surprising, given the price difference, but it would be nice if an OCR-specific model could p…

I got the opposite experience very recently : tried to OCR a bunch of handwritten emails addresses with chatGPT and I had to make so many corrections that I gave up. Whereas Mistral nailed it on first pass.

Which chatgpt model?

Re: Mistral OCR 4.1

#109

Post by lavieestdure »

dylan604 wrote: post #99
hadlock wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much like spaceflight, aerospace or nuclear engineering, you need to retain local talent for national defense purposes. Being 70% as good is still way better than being 100% dependent and heavily leveraged by your opponents.

Being 70% as good in nuclear engineering sounds scary AF. How would you rank Chernobyl? Better or worse than 70%?

Being 70% as good does not mean causing accidents. Accidents are caused by systematic operational failures and fundamental design flaws.

Re: Mistral OCR 4.1

#110

Post by zzleeper »

v3ss0n wrote: post #103
fn-mote wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally fake post. Gemini in the top?? For what?

Gemini is best at OCR and document extraction so far. We had tested for insurance needs. None match Gemini even flash level yet.

Same here. Maybe Fable is better but in terms of cost effectiveness it wouldn't even make sense to test it
Post reply on HN