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

Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 211 posts

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#201

Post by cdurth »

OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: post #90
cdurth wrote: post #62

I tried the Fugu models with some real world tales in C# and unity using mcp and open code. I exhausted the $20 plan 5 hour window in one prompt to review my theme system and plan some color changes. So I upgraded to the $100 to see the implementation and result. Well the result was worse than Opus, incredibly slow, and I ended up exhausting the new 5 hour window and have used 35% of the weekly now and it hardly crea…

We provide a similar service for Godot instead of Unity, and 20$ plan being exhausted in one prompt on a top model like Opus sounds about right. That's the life when you pay API prices and can't afford 10x subsidies.

Not sure if you meant Fable/Mythos instead of Opus, but I can comfortable work several hours a day using Opus on Max-Ultracode on the CC 10x.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#202

Post by cdurth »

LarsDu88 wrote: post #162
cdurth wrote: post #62

I tried the Fugu models with some real world tales in C# and unity using mcp and open code. I exhausted the $20 plan 5 hour window in one prompt to review my theme system and plan some color changes. So I upgraded to the $100 to see the implementation and result. Well the result was worse than Opus, incredibly slow, and I ended up exhausting the new 5 hour window and have used 35% of the weekly now and it hardly crea…

Which unity mcp do you use? I've been playing around with the official one, but was wondering what other folks use. Ran into a package conflict issue with the popular coplay one

I have been using the coplay MCP for Unity.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#203

Post by jaapz »

cevn wrote: post #151
ninjalanternshk wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah this is about the worst way you could imagine to evaluate an AI model. If you’d given it a real task you’d have been impressed. I was floored by the day I spent with Fable. Got weeks of work done.

Same. It was one shotting unbelievably well compared to 4.8.

And 4.8 on xhigh was/is already pretty impressive

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#204

Post by chrsw »

buthowjejddjeu wrote: post #173
chrsw wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't even look at benchmarks anymore. I just try different models as they're released on our large, proprietary, systems software codebases in real, shipping products or projects that will ship eventually. It's pretty clear which models help me do my job better or faster. I'm fortunate enough to have the token budget to use basically as much as I need, for now. No need for benchmarks, evals, marketing, system card…

I am not against AI but I do wonder how you guys handle the fact this leaks all your code and is stored forever on servers belonging to God knows who? I “trust” OpenAI and Anthropic (somewhat) but to be honest I still feel only safe using it on code without any secret sauce whatsoever. Luckily that’s a lot of code, but still. I wonder how others are looking at this? (FYI I feel the same about Github and we also don’t…

> how you guys handle the fact this leaks all your code and is stored forever on servers belonging to God knows who?

I don't.

My company doesn't host any code on GitHub, we have our own Git servers.

Regarding the privacy issues with OpenAI, Anthropic or anyone else, we engineers are just using the tools we've been authorized to use by the company. If there's a security issue, that would need to be worked out between the company and the model providers.

Would I use external model providers through an API for personal projects? For everything I'm doing now, probably. Could I see a day where I'm working on something too sensitive to be willing to give any data to these companies? Possibly.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#205

Post by janalsncm »

girvo wrote: post #93
janalsncm wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More specifically, political lobotomy shouldn’t affect coding ability.

You’d be quite surprised, I think. Fine tuning a model on one axis can have drastic impacts on another that as a human we would expect to be completely unrelated.

I have never seen anyone argue that this cannot be overcome with more high quality RLVR data.

The practical reality is that the Chinese and American models might have very different politics. But the most relevant factor in model performance is the quality and volume of training data, not ideology of the base model. Unless you are suggesting something very particular about the way Grok was neutered.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#206

Post by janalsncm »

buthowjejddjeu wrote: post #176
janalsncm wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If training a good model requires talent then that’s the answer to the question this thread is trying to answer: is training a good model actually that hard ?

Talent to do.. what? This could mean a lot of things. Navigating astronomically huge fundamentally not so hard but still really tangly and hairy projects requiring both excellent short- and long-term vision in an overheated domain with angry people and lots of money is a skill all of its own.

Talent to train high quality LLMs, especially coding LLMs.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#207

Post by DrScientist »

firefoxd wrote: post #114
neom wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would that work in practice?

All American services won't be allowed to provide the models. Huggingface for example. The same way BYDs are illegal in the US.

I can see this happening, but I suspect it will have the opposite to the intended effect - it will mean companies will move or move their R&D to countries with the appropriate freedoms.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#208

Post by Zababa »

cdurth wrote: post #201
OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We provide a similar service for Godot instead of Unity, and 20$ plan being exhausted in one prompt on a top model like Opus sounds about right. That's the life when you pay API prices and can't afford 10x subsidies.

Not sure if you meant Fable/Mythos instead of Opus, but I can comfortable work several hours a day using Opus on Max-Ultracode on the CC 10x.

Yes because you don't pay API costs with the Claude Code plans.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#209

Post by bloppe »

OutOfHere wrote: post #115
bloppe wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic always publishes 3p benchmarks every time they announce a new model

No, stop right there. Anything published by Anthropic implicitly is not third party. For it to be third party, the third party has to be the one publishing it.

When you're announcing a new model, typically, nobody else has benchmarked it yet, because it hasn't been released yet. You can still run 3p benchmarks on it and publish those results. If other parties later run the same benchmarks independently, and find major discrepancies, that would be a scandal.

Re: Asian AI startups launch Mythos-like models

#210

Post by cdurth »

Zababa wrote: post #208
cdurth wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if you meant Fable/Mythos instead of Opus, but I can comfortable work several hours a day using Opus on Max-Ultracode on the CC 10x.

Yes because you don't pay API costs with the Claude Code plans.

Sure, I understand the subsidization. Their limits are practically unusable and the marketing of "Focused working sessions for regular coding, review, research, and analysis throughout the week." is pretty disingenuous then.
Post reply on HN