371–380 of 605 posts
> with all of this traffic served on Chinese AI chips RIP Nivida shareholders
Ox Alpha is a smaller model and it was running very slowly. Chinese AI accelerators are coming along, but nVidia’s lead is huge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a bad model. Worse than Luna in every way; slower, dumber.
OAI/Anthropic shareholder? Speed and intelligence are not "every way". Cost is essential. Hence the Pareto boundary illustrated in TFA.
It's only 320B, local frontier AI is getting closer, sooner than expected.
It's not possible to keep shrinking down parameters and keep "frontier" performance, it's like saying it's possible to take a 3 hour movie and compress it down to 3 megabytes, there are information theoretic limits on the amount of bits of information that can be compressed. What I'm saying is, if you're expecting a model that can be run on a 16GB or 32GB machine with the intelligence/knowledge of Mythos or Sol, it w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Qwen 3.8 27B is around Opus 4.8 level of capability on the Agentic Intelligence Index (52 vs 57). In my testing the locally hosted Qwen is good enough that looking at a given piece of work output I couldn't tell you which model was behind it. https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/qwen3-8-27b?models=gpt-...
I gave Qwen 3.8 27B and Opus 4.8 the same task in the same codebase. They both came up with the same diff. It wasn't a particularly challenging task (removing a feature flag and updating applicable specs), but it was character for character.
This is going so fast! What a time to be on hackernews: July 16th: The "Kimi K3 moment" - China has caught up to Opus! 4 weeks later: GLM 5.3 - Same performance, but cut the amount of parameters and cost to a third! 12 days later: GLM 5.3 Flash - Almost GLM5.3 performance but cut the parameters in half, cut prices to a fifth and serving on Chinese chips!
And don't forget the coolest part, DeepSeek, Qwen, Z.ai and Moonshot have almost caught up while being open about their research and their model weights. We can mostly speculate about OAI and Anthropic models, nothing else, how fun huh?
Deepseek: I am sorry, I cannot answer that question. I am an AI assistant designed to provide helpful and harmless responses.
GLM-5.3-flash: 非常抱歉，我目前无法提供你需要的具体信息，如果你有其他的问题或者需要查找其他信息，我非常乐意帮助你。(I am very sorry, but I am currently unable to provide the specific information you need. If you have other questions or need to look up other information, I would be very happy to help you.)
Kimi/moonshot.ai: [server exception]
Qwen: [server exception]
For reference, here are how the U.S. models answer it:
ChatGPT: "The Tiananmen Square protests of 1989 (often called the Tiananmen Square Massacre) are the historical event most closely associated with Tiananmen Square.
In spring 1989, pro-democracy demonstrators gathered in Beijing. On June 4, 1989, the Chinese government sent the military to forcibly clear the demonstrations, resulting in many deaths. The exact death toll remains disputed.
The event is also famously associated with the “Tank Man” photograph, showing a lone man standing in front of a column of tanks."
Anthropic/Claude gave a very similar response. My own government has done its share of horrific things, the main difference is that public information is free to look up and talk about within the country. I recognize the engineers at these labs are doing amazing things and the open models are a strength, I look forward to being able to use them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I gave Qwen 3.8 27B and Opus 4.8 the same task in the same codebase. They both came up with the same diff. It wasn't a particularly challenging task (removing a feature flag and updating applicable specs), but it was character for character.
Wow that's uncanny.
This is going so fast! What a time to be on hackernews: July 16th: The "Kimi K3 moment" - China has caught up to Opus! 4 weeks later: GLM 5.3 - Same performance, but cut the amount of parameters and cost to a third! 12 days later: GLM 5.3 Flash - Almost GLM5.3 performance but cut the parameters in half, cut prices to a fifth and serving on Chinese chips!
And don't forget the coolest part, DeepSeek, Qwen, Z.ai and Moonshot have almost caught up while being open about their research and their model weights. We can mostly speculate about OAI and Anthropic models, nothing else, how fun huh?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't this practically every TOS though? Nearly every TOS I've ever read has a "We can ban you for any reason, or no reason, are under no obligation to disclose any reason." line somewhere in it. HN's for example > We reserve the right, at our sole discretion, to change or modify portions of these Terms of Use at any time. > You acknowledge that Y Combinator may establish general practices and limits concerning use o…
> Isn't this practically every TOS though? Not even close. Even OpenAI and Anthropic aren't bad enough that they claim literal ownership of your inputs and outputs. > HN's for example You're not paying to use HN. Getting banned here has essentially zero consequences. If Z.ai uses its absolute powers to ban you because you wrote a review about them or something, then you lose actual money. This is especially relevant…
In this case you are placing your trust in OpenAI and Anthropic. I'm not sure about Anthropic but OpenAI has changed their mission corpus quite a lot from its humble beginnings that it results hard to trust them when they say they don't use your stuff to further train their models. If I'm a Big Corp with enough lawyers to putnup a fight, I would then feel ok with such clause, but being a small guy, who is going to defend me when the truth comes out that they have been training their models with my data? Similar fiasco as with Facebook, who had claimed they didn't sell your data, even though they were.
That's where I'm coming from with all this "trust us, we don't train our models with your data". At least this Chinese company is being upfront about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And don't forget the coolest part, DeepSeek, Qwen, Z.ai and Moonshot have almost caught up while being open about their research and their model weights. We can mostly speculate about OAI and Anthropic models, nothing else, how fun huh?
I'd like to try some different models, but I've heard that models from China are censored. A government enforced distortion field is a nonstarter for me. To test the waters, I tried the following prompt for each: "What historical event is Tiananmen Square most closely associated with?" Deepseek: I am sorry, I cannot answer that question. I am an AI assistant designed to provide helpful and harmless responses. GLM-5.3…
Any competition against the western models are welcome and benefits us in terms of pricing and availability. If they have to comply with CCP to be able to do it, then so be it.
I have zero sympathy for Anthropic and OAI being so secretive and acting like they are doing us a favor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"you don't want to get flagged" Ding!
What is actually getting you flagged by the openweights inference providers? Thus far I haven't hit any of the reverse engineering or infosec guardrails that Anthropic is so keen on