491–500 of 540 posts
It feels like Anthropic's models from 6 months ago. I mean, it's great progress in the open weight world, but I don't have time to use anything less than the very best for the coding I do. At the same time, if Anthropic and OpenAI disappeared tomorrow, I could survive with GLM-5.
How is the very best right now? Smooth sailing or still frustrating at times?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This aligns very closely with my experience. When left to its own devices, GLM-4.7 frequently tries to build the world. It's also less capable at figuring out stumbling blocks on its own without spiralling. For small, well-defined tasks, it's broadly comparable to Sonnet. Given how incredibly cheap it is, it's useful even as a secondary model.
How is the web search functionality? I have only used deepseek to lower costs from gpt api but had to incorporate a serper to actually do web searches
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a strangely hostile statement on an open weight model. Running like 20 benchmark evaluations isn't trivial by itself, and even updating visuals and press statements can take a few days at a tech company. It's literally been 5 days since this "new generation" of models released. GPT-5.3(-codex) can't even be called via API, so it's impossible to test for some benchmarks. I notice the people who endlessly praise c…
but even opus 4.5 is history now, codex-5-3 and opus 4.6 are one more step forward. The opus itself caused paradigm shift, from writing code with AI, to ai is writing code with human. open weight models are not there at all yet.
It feels like Anthropic's models from 6 months ago. I mean, it's great progress in the open weight world, but I don't have time to use anything less than the very best for the coding I do. At the same time, if Anthropic and OpenAI disappeared tomorrow, I could survive with GLM-5.
How is the very best right now? Smooth sailing or still frustrating at times?
I also can create a feedback loop and let it run wild, which also works but that needs also planning and a harness, and rules etc. Usually not worth it if you need to jump between a million things like me.
It feels like Anthropic's models from 6 months ago. I mean, it's great progress in the open weight world, but I don't have time to use anything less than the very best for the coding I do. At the same time, if Anthropic and OpenAI disappeared tomorrow, I could survive with GLM-5.
How is the very best right now? Smooth sailing or still frustrating at times?
It might be impressive on benchmarks, but there's just no way for them to break through the noise from the frontier models. At these prices they're just hemorrhaging money. I can't see a path forward for the smaller companies in this space.
There is a well-known CLI tool for JSON processing called jq. I have just asked GLM-4.7 for the name of jq's built function to convert a string to lowercase. It is called ascii_downcase() according to the manual: https://jqlang.org/manual/#ascii_downcase-ascii_upcase However GLM-4.7 insists that is called ascii_down(). I tried to correct it and gave the exact version number, but still, after a long internal monologue…
Seems that I cannot use GLM-5 via the API yet, because I am on the Coding-Lite Plan, the most basic paid tier. I have also realized that I get faster and correct answer to the ascii_downcase question (even from GLM-4.7) when I submit to open.bigmodel.cn endpoint rather than the z.ai API endpoints (using the same API key). I get a mix of Chinese and Western characters in error responses from open.bigmodel.cn though, w…
[flagged]
Grey market fast-follow via distillation seems like an inevitable feature of the near to medium future. I've previously doubted that the N-1 or N-2 open weight models will ever be attractive to end users, especially power users. But it now seems that user preferences will be yet another saturated benchmark, that even the N-2 models will fully satisfy. Heck, even my own preferences may be getting saturated already. Op…
> No end-user on planet earth will suffer a single qualm at the notion that their bargain-basement Chinese AI provider 'stole' from American big tech. Just like nobody cares[0] that American big tech stole from authors of millions of books. [0] Interestingly, the only ones that cared were the FB employees told to pirate the Library Genesis and reporting back that "it didn't feel right".
Most authors don't own any interesting rights to their books because they are works for hire.
Maybe I would have gotten something, maybe not. Depends on the contract. One of my books that was used is from 1996. That contract did not say a lot about the internet, and I was also 16 at the time ;)
In practice they stole from a relatively small number of publishers. The rest is PR.
The settlement goes to authors in part because anything else would generate immensely bad PR.
As usual, nothing is really black and white