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

There is minimal downside to switching to open models

marble.onl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 351 posts

Re: There is minimal downside to switching to open models

#341

Post by [deleted] »

ignoramous wrote: post #338
epolanski wrote: post #304

I unsubscribed from Anthropic and our (EU-based) team is moving to an "ai-server" running opencode + GLM 5.2 and DS4. There are several benefits: - we cut AI spending by thousands - there is one AI server and starting different sessions for each user, one memory/skills/etc and everybody is involved into reviewing what went wrong and why. Harness finally makes sense and pays off more. - we can trust that the models ar…

> moving to an "ai-server" running opencode What's the configuration of this server? How many do you need to deploy for your team size / estimated usage, if you're comfortable sharing that?

[deleted]

Re: There is minimal downside to switching to open models

#342

Post by linzhangrun »

sho wrote: post #339
sho wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be right, and I certainly hope so! But the question was about whether the Chinese labs will have fable-equivalence in 1 year. I am by no means some kind of insider, but knowing the vaguest outlines of what went into Mythos, they just can't do it. The compute is not there. The Chinese engineers are incredible, but they're not literal magicians. Of course there could be something incredible to come out of left…

I'm going to leave my above comment for embarrassment/posterity, but since writing it I've driven GLM5.2 much more extensively and I take it back. 5.2 is surprisingly, even shockingly good. It seems MUCH better than when I tried it on day one, and I probably shouldn't have drawn solid conclusions from that as models often struggle a little on launch. I take it all back, 5.2 is very much competitive with any Opus and…

And GLM-5 is built on DeepSeek V3 :)

There is still a lot of optimization left to squeeze out of LLMs.

Re: There is minimal downside to switching to open models

#343

Post by senordevnyc »

bonesss wrote: post #324
senordevnyc wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine having a business where you're at the mercy of the fluctuations in capacity, performance, and capability that your human employees display!

… all of which can be controlled through scheduling, and has been baked into all business operations since before money was invented. Meatspace fluctuations are predictable, quantifiable, and manageable through planning. The changes to hosted model behaviour are not. Literally, the prompt terms used to manage document reading can change multiple times within a day. MS and Oracle provide decades-long consistent interf…

True, but we'll get there with AI models as well. To your point, we've had millennia to learn how to build large business operations on top of fickle humans, and we'll figure it out for AI too. Just getting started.

Re: There is minimal downside to switching to open models

#344

Post by hvb2 »

throwaway27448 wrote: post #330
hvb2 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You might want to read the 3rd paragraph of this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merger_of_Skydance_Media_and_P... Read that timeline and then see if you're still convinced that they didn't at least seem to have done a thing or 2 to appease the federal government

Of course, but that's business. Authoritarianism would imply a conflict unresolvable outside of state violence.

If you think that's business, wherever you are is a place where I don't want to live.

Yes, companies do have to do things in order to appease regulators. But typically that's where a regulator says what they need them to do and then they oblige. Those requests usually involve market power and such, and splitting off part of the company. They don't involve the actual content/product of said company

Re: There is minimal downside to switching to open models

#345

Post by davidpapermill »

petesergeant wrote: post #200

Headline: "The is minimal downside" Article: "I’m hoping it’s going to be minimal"

Should be top comment.

I think there _are_ downsides to using open models.

Quality won't be as good. That's a given, at least with SOTA. But there's more: switching between models means qualitative changes in replies, and in strengths and weaknesses on evals. You're also on the "open source track" and there's no guaranteed upgrade path - the creator may simply stop publishing new models. And the fact that they're mostly from China comes with political, provenance, and governance issues.

I think NVIDIA's models are the most promising, because they can serve as a foundation for new model companies. That's a meta-feature that keeps the proprietary models in check. And NVIDIA's incentives are very likely to remain aligned with open-source: they want to encourage competing solutions that rely on their third party hardware.

Re: There is minimal downside to switching to open models

#346

Post by ignoramous »

johndough wrote: post #128
2muchtime wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The amount the HN community, at least from what I’ve seen, is sleeping on OpenCode Go (and zen) is kind of amazing. $10 a month gets you generous usage with the best open weight models and they claim to have zero retention and not to train on your usage. It’s unclear to me what the advantages of openrouter are but it seems to be a default I see many people talking about here.

> It’s unclear to me what the advantages of openrouter are but it seems to be a default I see many people talking about here. The advantage of OpenRouter compared to using API providers directly is that you can switch between API providers without binding your money to a single provider. The advantage of OpenRouter compared to OpenCode Go is that the price for DeepSeek-V4-Pro and MiMo-V2.5-Pro is better on OpenRouter…

> DeepSeek costs $0.435/0.87/0.003625 for 1M in/out/cached tokens, compared to an equivalent of $1.74/3.48/0.0145 under the OpenCode Go plan, almost exactly 4x.

Folks who have noticed this have raised public concern, but I don't think the team has ever responded (there's 5k open issues, so I don't blame them for not triaging): https://github.com/anomalyco/opencode/issues/28846

Even so, after reading your comment, it makes me uncomfortable advocating spending on more OpenCode Go subs for the team.

Re: There is minimal downside to switching to open models

#347

Post by NicuCalcea »

0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #333
NicuCalcea wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In spaces and interactions I control, the definition is up to me.

"Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech." Noam Chomsky

"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them."

"We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal."

Karl Popper

Re: There is minimal downside to switching to open models

#348

Post by solumunus »

nxm wrote: post #159
solumunus wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The UK can arrest you for hate speech. You can disagree with that policy on free speech terms if you want, and that’s really a maximal free speech position. It’s a very strange position to hold if you’re claiming that the U.S. is better when it comes to free speech. The U.S. administration is engaged in active smear campaigns against anyone who speaks loudly against them, threatened to revoke licenses of media compan…

I as a individual won’t get arrested for speaking my mind, and that’s much more important than some legal battle around corporate media. „ deployed the military in cities they don’t like for no other reason than intimidation of political rivals” That’s one perspective on simply trying to enforce laws. Moreover, let’s not forget about how Biden government tried to silence Rogan.

> I as a individual won’t get arrested for speaking my mind

Assuming you’re not a violent bigot you would also be fine in the UK.

> Moreover, let’s not forget about how Biden government tried to silence Rogan.

So your response to my claim that the US is worse is to point to other anti free speech practices by previous US governments? Well done!

Re: There is minimal downside to switching to open models

#349

Post by 0xDEAFBEAD »

NicuCalcea wrote: post #347
0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Goebbels was in favor of free speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you’re really in favor of free speech, then you’re in favor of freedom of speech for precisely the views you despise. Otherwise, you’re not in favor of free speech." Noam Chomsky

"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them." "We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement p…

A good argument for not tolerating capricious censors like you?

Re: There is minimal downside to switching to open models

#350

Post by NicuCalcea »

0xDEAFBEAD wrote: post #349
NicuCalcea wrote: post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them." "We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement p…

A good argument for not tolerating capricious censors like you?

Thats's absolutely fine, I will not tolerate fascists and they can not tolerate me.
Post reply on HN