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

GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

z.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 626 posts

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#361

Post by idiotsecant »

edot wrote: post #297
regularfry wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question mark in my mind over the technological superiority is whether the additional volume of data they see due to capturing the top of the market allows them to do recursive self-improvement in a way nobody else can match, before any of the other labs can figure it out. That's the only runaway outcome I can see.

But is that data good? That's the question. As in, is my usage at work: a) indicative of problems that aren't already out there in the wild? (no) b) are the responses I'm getting so good and novel that the model can improve itself? (no) It's the garbage in garbage out idea, just scaled up. If the model gave a bad answer, and I didn't catch it, and you now train on that I/O pair (my perhaps crappy prompt, the bad outp…

It seems like the user response rating mechanism might be a valuable signal

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#362

Post by dmix »

aqme28 wrote: post #349
gigatexal wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m in the Claude code harness for everything boat too. What are the alternatives?

ArtificialAnalysis puts out benchmarks for harnesses now as well, and OpenCode seems to be winning it. https://artificialanalysis.ai/agents/coding-agents#coding-ag... I only found this yesterday, and it inspired me to start testing out OpenCode.

I'm not surprised to also see Cursor above Claude code, their harness is very good.

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#363

Post by infecto »

gigatexal wrote: post #354
gigatexal wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m in the Claude code harness for everything boat too. What are the alternatives?

thank you all! got something to tinker with this weekend i like to challenge my assumptions and try new tools

Just as a +1 anecdote. I enjoy using pi a lot. I used to h think the harness matters a lot but with the current iteration of models I am starting to sway that while it matters it’s less and less important and that CC is bloated. I did some quick tests when I switched and a task that would take $5 in tokens would be completed in $0.50 in pi. Very anecdotal and I don’t have a test framework setup to make this very official but increasingly felt like CC was spinning its wheels on the easiest of tasks.

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#364

Post by [deleted] »

leobuskin wrote: post #305

I bought $18 GLM official subscription yesterday (5.2, but new model version was already leaking on some docs), set it up with Claude Code harness... and I’ve bumped to $80 plan almost immediately. It’s the first model that agreed on a proper security research (red team scenario), executed it seamlessly, including 0-days in WP plugins, RCE, 6.8 kernel exploit adaptation, etc - while playing against another GLM agent…

[deleted]

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#366

Post by misiti3780 »

leobuskin wrote: post #305

I bought $18 GLM official subscription yesterday (5.2, but new model version was already leaking on some docs), set it up with Claude Code harness... and I’ve bumped to $80 plan almost immediately. It’s the first model that agreed on a proper security research (red team scenario), executed it seamlessly, including 0-days in WP plugins, RCE, 6.8 kernel exploit adaptation, etc - while playing against another GLM agent…

how do you configure claude code to use GLM ?

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#367

Post by idiotsecant »

Zambyte wrote: post #329
eru wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is anything going to be catastrophic? Companies can go bankrupt without catastrophes for the rest of us. Happens all the time.

I read it as catastrophic for the companies trying to IPO. It'll be great for the rest of us though.

A large portion of the economy is currently tied up in the musical chairs shell game that is AI hype. When the music stops there are going to be CEOs looking for handouts and justifying it with spooky national security buzzwords. How we respond to that will depend on whether it happens in an admin that is famously captured by the industry or not.

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#368

Post by leobuskin »

dmix wrote: post #362
aqme28 wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ArtificialAnalysis puts out benchmarks for harnesses now as well, and OpenCode seems to be winning it. https://artificialanalysis.ai/agents/coding-agents#coding-ag... I only found this yesterday, and it inspired me to start testing out OpenCode.

I'm not surprised to also see Cursor above Claude code, their harness is very good.

In what scenarios?

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#369

Post by Majromax »

rbehrends wrote: post #285
z4y5f3 wrote: post #128

Apparently they are scanning OSS and popular software at scale and disclosing the vulnerabilities they found: https://cvd.z.ai/ Most of these are under embargo, but it seems there are a lot of CVE here from a wide range of popular software, many considered critical or high. I understand the argument of "people are not actively looking", but isn't the cost for such a scan getting lower by the week, and Anthropic's Pro…

> I understand the argument of "people are not actively looking", but isn't the cost for such a scan getting lower by the week, and Anthropic's Project Glasswing is supposed to find them quite a while ago? You have to consider that having an LLM scan for vulnerabilities is hardly infallible. It is a search guided by heuristics and given a large enough codebase, it is unlikely to identify all vulnerabilities. Personal…

> [A]ll of them found some that the others hadn't discovered. Now, correctness issues aren't the same as vulnerabilities, but the same principle about using heuristics to find defects applies.

This makes perfect sense, but that conflicts with the impression put forward by Anthropic and OpenAI (in particular) that they alone occupy 'frontier model' spots. Frontier models should large dominate their competitors on a capability basis, but if GLM 5.2 (now 5.3) is routinely finding bugs / vulnerabilities missed by Fable and Sol then GLM might be genuinely a frontier-grade model by itself.

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#370

Post by bensyverson »

aqme28 wrote: post #349
gigatexal wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m in the Claude code harness for everything boat too. What are the alternatives?

ArtificialAnalysis puts out benchmarks for harnesses now as well, and OpenCode seems to be winning it. https://artificialanalysis.ai/agents/coding-agents#coding-ag... I only found this yesterday, and it inspired me to start testing out OpenCode.

Can OpenCode dispatch background subagents yet? I tried it a week ago and saw nothing. This is 99% of my workflow at this point.
Post reply on HN