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

GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

z.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 626 posts

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#251

Post by Synthetic7346 »

SwellJoe wrote: post #26
LeonidBugaev wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only attackers. I have to switch to Kimi or GLM even in cases of basic issue triage on my own projects! Current guardrails are ridiculous.

I've been building a harness for security work, and had to switch to GPT 5.5 when even Opus started refusing security work. Then 5.6 Sol arrived, and it refuses security work, too. So, I switched to Kimi K3 and DeepSeek for API testing just because it's so much cheaper. But, if GLM is better, I'm here for it, as I think GLM is also cheaper than K3.

Mind sharing a link?

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#253

Post by mcintyre1994 »

zorked wrote: post #181
sscaryterry wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting... So Chinese models are not so bad ?

There's a chance that the real reason why they want to ban Chinese models is that they are so good at fixing bugs and preventing exploits that intelligence agencies have been using for espionage and surveillance for a long time.

I don't think this really works because the Chinese government is going to be incentivised to tip off the US companies to deny the US government those exploits. I guess maybe that's what the open source patch program here is about, making sure banning the models doesn't work because they can just report the exploits without the company running the model themselves.

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#254

Post by rxyz »

adrian_b wrote: post #114
somenameforme wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another interesting potential market here will be 'LLM in a box'. All the hardware and other tooling in a prebuilt, but modular, package ready to go. Pay one up-front cost, get a system running [whatever open LLM] with a token rate of [x], optionally configured to be immediately ready for distributed usage. Basically the opposite of cloud stuff: no rent, no dependency, 100% guaranteed uptime, guaranteed security/priv…

Palantir already offers a "turnkey AI datacenter", i.e. a rack with "NVIDIA Blackwell Ultra systems with eight NVIDIA Blackwell Ultra GPUs and NVIDIA Spectrum-X™ Ethernet networking for AI training and inference". It is said that it comes with all hardware and software required to run inference or training with an open weights LLM. The existence of this product, which competes with cloud-based offerings like those of…

How is this different from buying a supermicro rack? Better support?

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#256

Post by budsniffer952 »

orbital-decay wrote: post #199
maipen wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you actually believe this?

Why would you even believe the opposite? US spooks have been amassing vulnerabilities and relying on them for decades, they literally pioneered it in the 90's if not earlier. Everyone does it now but the US is the biggest of them all. Surely this devalues a lot of what they did. Moreover, the way the US government handled new capabilities, and OpenAI's training policy (they are in bed with the government) just scream…

[flagged]

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#257

Post by cyanydeez »

zorked wrote: post #181
sscaryterry wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting... So Chinese models are not so bad ?

There's a chance that the real reason why they want to ban Chinese models is that they are so good at fixing bugs and preventing exploits that intelligence agencies have been using for espionage and surveillance for a long time.

when in doubt, it's better to assume capitalism than anything else.

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#258

Post by eru »

Gigachad wrote: post #124
MangoCoffee wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OpenAI and Anthropic are both seeking trillion IPOs, while Chinese labs are pumping out open-weight models that are free for US providers to host and monetize. These Chinese models cost less of US SOTA models to run, even if they are less capable. Providers can just run them, offer cheap tokens, and pocket the margin. I just don't see how you justify a trillion valuation for US AI labs when the underlying models are…

This is going to be catastrophic. Whether AI works or is useful or not isn’t even the question anymore. It can fulfil every promise Sam Altman has been making and will still make no financial sense to justify these valuations.

Why is anything going to be catastrophic? Companies can go bankrupt without catastrophes for the rest of us. Happens all the time.

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#259

Post by cyanydeez »

dhx wrote: post #161
Gigachad wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is going to be catastrophic. Whether AI works or is useful or not isn’t even the question anymore. It can fulfil every promise Sam Altman has been making and will still make no financial sense to justify these valuations.

I take it from [1] (transcript of recent DeepSeek CEO discussion with investors) that DeepSeek would disagree on the immediate catastrophic impact to the likes of OpenAI or Anthropic. The reason is even though technology parity mostly exists, only OpenAI, Anthropic et al have the inference capacity to gain market share and generate revenue. Chinese vendors don't have the chips needed to scale up inference and gain ma…

they have the capacity via market manipulation; so you know, they only have things they've bought on the governments future debt obligations.

so, you know, they're as vulnerable as utilities at this point, if only there were people who gave a shit more about society than greed.

Re: GLM-5.3: Frontier coding with emergent cyber capabilities

#260

Post by [deleted] »

andsoitis wrote: post #240
grey-area wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Circular investment deals and investment deals at valuations which have no possible justification.

Let me ask it differently. You state the companies and their investors are colluding. Who are they colluding against ?

[deleted]
Post reply on HN