Live data from Hacker News

GLM-5.3 is now open-weight

huggingface.co

131–140 of 298 posts

Re: GLM-5.3 is now open-weight

#131
post #25

I'd like to ask Sam Altman if he still thinks that it's too dangerous to publish GPT-3. I mean, no one would use it, but what is his reasoning for not publishing it now, in 2026?

In some interviews, OAI mentioned that they didn't think that GPT-3.5 would be a success. They thought it would be a cool toy and they decided to launch it to see how users react. That means that they didn't think GPT-3.5 was intelligent enough. But somehow once GPT-3.5 became a huge hit, people conveniently ignored the anecdote, and started to believe that AGI had been eminent.

Re: GLM-5.3 is now open-weight

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll be very curious what you get with DDR4. I also almost went that way. I have an Epyc DDR 5 rig and the best I see is 10 tok/s. Caveat being that’s at Q8 and a 4090 doing pre fill so it could be pushed up. The surprising thing for me is how much work you will need to cool the banks if you’re near your memory ceiling. My memory starts soft throttling at about 74C (dies may be hotter, that’s the bank temp) and will…

I was running one of the older llamas (3.1 I think?) at slow-ish (10-20 tok/sec at Q4?) but OK speeds on 12 year old DDR3 ECC Xeon machine

I find 10 to be very usable. It’s not (that) interactive but it chews through tasks. I let Kimi churn away at 4 overnight and it gives good results that are ready for me in the morning.

Re: GLM-5.3 is now open-weight

#133
post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When we consider: * LLM usage is new for the world * Models are evolving quickly with high worldwide competition * Hardware is evolving despite RAM shortages Is investing a huge sum of money in equipment for local inference a wise use of money? Or are M5 Ultra and equivalently priced local inference hardware future-proof enough to be worth it relative to how the market is evolving? Maybe it’s all a question of what y…

Part of it is knowing that whatever sort of enshittification the cloud providers do, my local programming environment won’t ever be less effective than it is today locally. It’s the same reason my entire development stack from editor to compiler is open source. I don’t need to modify it today, but I always must retain the option to do so later. There are several things I do in my life that only pay off in the event o…

> Part of it is knowing that whatever sort of enshittification the cloud providers do, my local programming environment won’t ever be less effective than it is today locally.

Is that true though? Many of the core LLMs need to be retrained as languages evolve to incorporate changes (language specifics, compilers, tooling, etc.). To some degree this can be handled via context injection in a variety do forms (agents looking up documentation and so on) but inevitably it’s not stationary in time, just as your OSS stack (probably) isn’t (depending on the languages, technologies, and use cases).

So your hardware is to some degree dependent on the good merit of groups like Z or Alibaba or whomever pushing out updated open weight models that dumped loads of capital into to train. You can keep using the existing models but at some point I suspect they’ll start to have more friction due to dated specs in language and so on. Again there are tuning and ways of layering this information on, and in theory you can even do some training on your own but I don’t think it’s as stationary as being portrayed here.

Those updated open weight models may not always be there (updated on new data). The usability of them is probably fairly long to be fair, but I suspect you’re going to see explosion in everything from libraries to languages etc due to LLMs so even the rate of change across your OSS stack may cause these models to be dated quite quickly, at least in the core model which will require layering fixes.

To be clear I’m on the fence thinking about much of the same issues and as close as I am to pulling the trigger, I keep thinking of very valid counter arguments as to why it’s me just wanting this thing I own. Which may be enough.

Re: GLM-5.3 is now open-weight

#134
post #2

I've been using it more and more. Feels like Opus 4.8, in the best possible way.

I'm starting to think Opus 4.8 is significantly smaller than most people assume. If it's significantly larger than GLM 5.3 (I've heard some insane guesstimates out there like upwards of 5T params or more), that would prove rather embarrassing for Anthropic.

4.7 and 4.8 are smaller than 4.5 and 4.6

(And 4.5 was smaller than 4)

Re: GLM-5.3 is now open-weight

#135

how feasible is it build a SOTA specialized model for some use case e.g. deal sourcing by using this as pre-trained model or a LORA or similar pattern on top? Gonna shoot my shot at a billion dollar business

Not feasible. We’ve seen again and again that generalized models—somewhat surprisingly—dunk on specialized ones in almost all cases.

The first case of this I remember was Bloomberg thinking that their extensive private data about markets would give a home-trained model better performance in finance tasks. The next version of ChatGPT beat them.

With how often new versions of frontier models are released, you likely won’t finish your work before it’s obsolete. The labs have whole teams dedicated to specific getting training data for specific industries (finance is one), and more powerful generalized models make better decisions even without specialized knowledge.

Your best bet is to get really good at training for something and then sell your company to one of the frontier labs for their post-training efforts.

Re: GLM-5.3 is now open-weight

#136
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you click on the provider name, the panel that pops up shows a "Region" value. Not every provider lists their region, however.

I think the region is just the HQ of the provider. So z.ai's region is Singapore but it's quite likely that their servers are actually in China

I don't think that's right, or if it is, OpenRouter has incorrect data. Several Chinese companies (headquartered in China) have Singapore listed as their region on OR. And some companies, like Alibaba Cloud, have multiple regions listed.

I'm happy to be proven wrong, but this makes me think that the region is where the servers are, not where the HQ is.

Re: GLM-5.3 is now open-weight

#137

how feasible is it build a SOTA specialized model for some use case e.g. deal sourcing by using this as pre-trained model or a LORA or similar pattern on top? Gonna shoot my shot at a billion dollar business

yes would also be interested in that - using knowledge distillation and other special knowledge sources to post-train on top of an open model like GLM-5.3. I was wondering that when Elon Musk tweeted "Specialist AI’s (single language, single area of knowledge) are another 100X" (src: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/2089968914596045178) - maybe he knows something regarding specialist model training the general public does not know?

Re: GLM-5.3 is now open-weight

#138
Stealth Ox-Alpha was GLM-5.3-Flash, and Ox-Alpha was a strong coder (way better than DS4Flash). With both GLM 5.3 and GLM 5.3 Flash, I don't think I'll need any better coding models. The main thing I need now is faster, not better.

Re: GLM-5.3 is now open-weight

#140

GLM 5.3 is probably the sweet spot open weights model if you want to go beyond deepseek flash or the new glm flash. I used it with pi and had a fairly good time, especially since it’s less touchy about cyber and whatnot than the US guys. It’s slightly behind Kimi in ability but it’s a lot easier to run it, I’d expect prices (and speed!) from third parties to be noticeably better. Assuming you’re willing to drop a fat…

When we consider: * LLM usage is new for the world * Models are evolving quickly with high worldwide competition * Hardware is evolving despite RAM shortages Is investing a huge sum of money in equipment for local inference a wise use of money? Or are M5 Ultra and equivalently priced local inference hardware future-proof enough to be worth it relative to how the market is evolving? Maybe it’s all a question of what y…

Jalapeno is matching or very near Vera Rubin at 1/4 the power. I would not buy hardware now.
Post reply on HN