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

Magistral — the first reasoning model by Mistral AI

mistral.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 444 posts

Re: Magistral — the first reasoning model by Mistral AI

#131

Post by chairmansteve »

vikramkr wrote: post #38
mrtksn wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Europe isn't going to catch up in tech as long as its market is open to US tech giants. Tech doesn't have marginal costs, so you want to have one of it in one place and sell it everywhere and when the infra and talent is already in US, EU tech is destined to do niche products. UK has a bit of it, France has some and that's it. The only viable alternatives are countries who have issues with US and that is China and Ru…

If you close off the market to US tech giants, maybe they'll have some amount of market dominance at home, but I would doubt that would mean they've "caught up" tech wise. There would be no incentive to compete. American EV manufacturing is pretty far behind Chinese EV manufacturing, protectionism didn't help make a competitive car, it just protected the home market while slowly ceding international market after inte…

China is an example of protectionism working. The world is not governed by simple rules.

Re: Magistral — the first reasoning model by Mistral AI

#132

Post by gwervc »

whiplash451 wrote: post #127
derektank wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And, perhaps most relevantly, the regulatory environment the people are working in. French people working in America are probably more productive than French people working in France (if for no other reason because they probably work more hours in America than France).

> they probably work more hours in America than France Not sure that's even true. Mistral is known to be a really hard-working place

I'm pretty sure there is way less regulations in the US in respect to France where going over the legal 35h/week requires additional capital and legal paperwork.

Re: Magistral — the first reasoning model by Mistral AI

#133

Post by resource_waste »

arnaudsm wrote: post #18

I wished the charts included Qwen3, the current SOTA in reasoning. Qwen3-4B almost beats Magistral-22B on the 4 available benchmarks, and Qwen3-30B-A3B is miles ahead.

No surprise on my end. Mistral has been basically useless due to other models always being better.

But its European, so its a point of pride.

Relevance or not, we will keep hearing the name as a result.

Re: Magistral — the first reasoning model by Mistral AI

#134

Post by int_19h »

MoonGhost wrote: post #90
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly the US approach to AI is incredibly irresponsible. As an American, I'm glad that someone somewhere is thinking about regulation. Not sure it will be enough though: https://xcancel.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1922710969785917691#m

No, thanks, we don't want to be like EU. Everything regulated to death. They even thought to criminalize street photography because there could be copyrighted materials in the picture. Not sure, are they still taxing Eiffel tower images?

EU is not a monolithic entity, and amount of regulation varies widely. Baltics are very business friendly, for example.

Re: Magistral — the first reasoning model by Mistral AI

#135

Post by SparkyMcUnicorn »

arnaudsm wrote: post #18

I wished the charts included Qwen3, the current SOTA in reasoning. Qwen3-4B almost beats Magistral-22B on the 4 available benchmarks, and Qwen3-30B-A3B is miles ahead.

30-A3B is a really impressive model.

I throw tasks at it running locally to save on API costs, and it's possibly better than anything we had a year or so ago from closed source providers. For programming tasks, I'd rank it higher than gpt-4o

Re: Magistral — the first reasoning model by Mistral AI

#136

Post by umbra07 »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #60
__alexs wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU regulation is often "you can not have the cool thing" not "the cool thing must be operated equitably". I think they are more interested in protecting old money than in protecting people.

I think usb-c and third party app stores are pretty cool

I think the government shouldn't be legislating that companies must use a specific USB connector.

Realistically the legislation was only targeting Apple. If consumers want USB-C, then they can vote with their wallets and buy an Android, which is a reasonable alternative.

Re: Magistral — the first reasoning model by Mistral AI

#137

Post by oceanplexian »

baq wrote: post #76
SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, just a quick question… why does Europe not have the money actual/people?

edit: the parent has since edited out the flamebait. Maybe, or maybe when silicon valley was busy growing exponentially Europe was still picking itself up from the mess of ww2. Trying to blame a single reason is futile, naive and childish.

The US was out-innovating Europe a long time before WW2, we had faster, more extensive rail systems, superior high rise construction, earlier to electrification, invention of the telephone, modern manufacturing (Model T), invention of the airplane, the birth of Hollywood and modern motion pictures, the list goes on.

Re: Magistral — the first reasoning model by Mistral AI

#138

Post by umbra07 »

kobe_bryant wrote: post #118
rafram wrote: post #30

Is the number of em-dashes in this marketing copy indicative of the kind of output that the model produces? If so, might want to tone it down a bit.

it's bizarre. the first sentence is "Announcing Magistral — the first reasoning model by Mistral AI — excelling in domain-specific, transparent, and multilingual reasoning." and those should clearly be comma and this sentence is just flat out wrong "Lack of specialized depth needed for domain-specific problems, limited transparency, and inconsistent reasoning in the desired language — are just some of the known limit…

really? i would have written it the exact same way (with dashes instead of commas).

Re: Magistral — the first reasoning model by Mistral AI

#139

Post by syntex »

roboboffin wrote: post #92
roboboffin wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that their point was that the problem is easily solvable by humans without code, and shows the ability to chain steps together to achieve a goal.

Not sure why I am being downvoted. I am simply saying that we know there is a defined algorithm for solving Tower of Hanoi, and the source code for it is widely available. So, o3 producing the code as an answer, demonstrates even less intelligence, as it means it is either memorized or copied from the internet. I don't see how this point counters the paper at all. I believe what they are trying to show in that paper,…

I didn't downvote. T the problem with the paper is that it asks the model to output all moves for, say, 15 disks 2 ^ 15 - 1 = 32767

32767 moves in a single prompt. That's not testing reasoning. That’s testing whether the model can emit a huge structured output without error, under a context window limit.

The authors then treat failure to reproduce this entire sequence as evidence that the model can't reason. But that’s like saying a calculator is broken because its printer jammed halfway through printing all prime numbers under 10000.

For me o3 returning Python code isn’t a failure. It’s a smart shortcut. The failure is in the benchmark design. This benchmark just smells.

Re: Magistral — the first reasoning model by Mistral AI

#140

Post by humpty-d »

rsanek wrote: post #34
funnym0nk3y wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thought so too. I don't know how it could be different though. They are competing against behemoths like OpenAI or Google, but have only 200 people. Even Anthropic has over 1000 people. DeepSeek has less than 200 people so the comparison seems fair.

any claim from the deepseek folks should be considered with wide margins of error.

I know we distrust them on account of being nefarious Chinese, but has anything come to light with R1 or the people behind it specifically to justify this?
Post reply on HN