Another thing these AI giants should worry about is the local deployment
A $4,699 DGX Spark can easily run Qwen 3.6 35B, and its performance crushes GPT-o1, the SOTA from two years ago
The unbearable cheapness of open weight models
181–190 of 195 posts
Re: The unbearable cheapness of open weight models
#182Re: The unbearable cheapness of open weight models
#183Re: The unbearable cheapness of open weight models
#184[flagged]
Re: The unbearable cheapness of open weight models
#185Earlier quoted context omitted.
i'd love to hear about this! do you have examples?
https://aisle.com/blog/aisle-discovers-6-new-cves-in-curl-in...
I see "LLM discovers vulnerability in curl" and I get skeptical, given how Daniel Stenberg has talked about the flood of claimed vulnerabilities that weren't real issues once he looked into them (as most HN readers already know, I'm sure). But it looks like these 6 were real issues, that curl patched once they received the reports. Five ended up rated low and one medium, but given the amount of attention curl gets, I'd honestly be surprised if there were any high-severity issues; in fact, having even one medium-severity issue remaining is slightly surprising to me.
Re: The unbearable cheapness of open weight models
#186Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are you even talking about? Everyone knows that Anthropic is drastically subsidizing their plans. It's actually the exact opposite of what you're talking about. The costs are extremely high and the prices are actually what's being subsidized and cheap right now.
This is an example of common knowledge that is wrong. People look at their cash burn, assume that they spend this to subsidize inference, and get bonkers answers. Inference is not their largest expense. Inference is cheap. Anthropic is only drastically subsidizing their plans if you count their training expenses as part of their costs.
But the training expense is part of their costs!
The question is can they just stop training at some point, fixing the models in time, and still have a useful product.
Re: The unbearable cheapness of open weight models
#187Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok so you're ignoring the entire thing. Sigh .
On the contrary: I've paid a lot of attention, causing me to look at it closely and determine it is a terrible idea worthy of an illustrated 5,000 word blog post explaining exactly how terrible. If you build the DC satellites as currently specified, you're strictly better off not launching them. That's how bad the idea is.
[dead]
Re: The unbearable cheapness of open weight models
#188Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Outside of coding, almost every business case for AI doesn’t need above human intelligence, it doesn’t even need human intelligence, or half a human intelligence, a business can extract a lot of value from a machine that has a fraction of a human’s intelligence. What the business world actually needed isn't intelligence, it's VBA with a bit of polish on it. Yeah, people want tools to distill reports, and puff nonse…
I have deployed very successful LLM based software that reads sales people emails and inserts orders, or stuff akin to orders, in the rest of the systems. Can you write me a regex that parses a messy human email thread and produces a clean JSON with all the order details? It's been working for a year with less than 3% error rate, better than what the humans themselves were doing.
it's astounding how much of human work are tasks like the one you have described here. Dancing around messy interfaces because nobody bothered to properly standardize and automate
Re: The unbearable cheapness of open weight models
#189I don’t get it. So many here are saying open weight models will kill the frontier labs. But open source and similar have tried to beat private companies everywhere all the time, and people still buy the best products even if great open source alternatives are available. Why wouldn’t this be the case for AI too?
the difference here is that switching is trivial due to standardized APIs to the underlying LLM capability.
harness gateway inference provider
Easy to switch any of them and (mostly) possible to combine any with any
Replacing something like Excel is crazy-hard because of network effects, replacing an Enterprise CRM is akin to a removing a metastasizing cancer
Re: The unbearable cheapness of open weight models
#190Earlier quoted context omitted.
'Reach AGI', the same way SpaceX will put data centers in orbit. A pipe dream.
> will put data centers in orbit. A pipe dream. Cheap access to space was once a pipe dream. Reusable boosters were once a pipe dream. A new player beating Boeing to the ISS was once a pipe dream. LEO constellations were once a pipe dream. Launching thousands of satellites was once a pipe dream. You should know that a) they are already running "AI" chips on their current sats. and b) they are already producing kW of…
Sure, you can do it. I bet humans could fly to Mars if we invested a massive amount of resources into it. Why, though? That’s the “easy” if you throw sufficient amounts of money at problems over sufficient periods of time you can solve them.
If you don’t care about making any more from it. How exactly would datacenters in space would be more profitable than those on earth?