It came back, died, and now it's back as some kind of weird AI-focused news aggregator.
binsquare 11 minutes ago [-]
this sentence hurts to read
stefan_ 9 minutes ago [-]
But they have such great AI generated insights on their AI stories:
"Many users praise Zhipu for open-sourcing GLM-5.2 under MIT with a 1M context window as a major step for accessible AI, while others respond with insults and anti-Chinese hostility."
LearnYouALisp 2 minutes ago [-]
I mean, it reads almost like an abstract of papers I've recently seen, with a similar info-cramming approach (probably the editorial-SEO equivalent of keywords).
skybrian 55 minutes ago [-]
It seems to be basically a Twitter mirror with extra cruft?
theturtletalks 14 minutes ago [-]
More like a curator of all the AI news on Twitter. It’s also a great way to find trending AI projects on GitHub and elsewhere
mannycalavera42 33 minutes ago [-]
digg goes along with slashdot and freshmeat memories.
good 'ol mems
jaggederest 10 minutes ago [-]
... for nostalgia's sake ...
It is official; Netcraft now confirms: BSD is dying
tamimio 33 minutes ago [-]
That’s my thoughts exactly, had to click the home page to double check!
satvikpendem 51 minutes ago [-]
Released at the exact same time, 5:21 pm (Chinese time), as when Anthropic received the letter from the government banning Fable, and explicitly citing other models becoming unusable.
ls612 2 hours ago [-]
Is it a coincidence that both MiniMax and Z.ai are releasing frontier open weights models right as the USG is trying to impose a cap on model capability offered to the public?
bontaq 1 hours ago [-]
I think Z.ai rushed a bit for release, for example GLM 5.2 is only available under the coding plan right now and they didn't do a big write up. Not even some charts and graphs about its performance!
This is around when people were predicting a new GLM to come out, so a couple corners clipped in order to catch the moment. I'm using it right now and it seems decent, but I haven't done heavy work with it yet. The expanded context window is great.
wolttam 58 minutes ago [-]
This is typical for GLM releases.
halJordan 19 minutes ago [-]
No, not really. This has been telegraphed for a long time by everyone involved. HN denizens have been unashamedly anti-ai for years now, so what makes sense is the not knowing part of this audience. Chinese models are also not frontier models.
lubujackson 2 hours ago [-]
I would say yes.
You think they were sitting on a release waiting for the right marketing moment?
bel8 1 hours ago [-]
Yes?
I have seen enough OpenAI and Anthropic carefuly timed marketing plays to expect it.
I would never announce GLM 5.2 in the same day as Fable or Apple's WWDC, for example.
enraged_camel 1 hours ago [-]
I think it's a possibility, because labs trying to one-up each other is a fairly common phenomenon at this point. Previous Opus releases were immediately followed by GPT releases, for example. At some point the timing stops being a mere coincidence.
thefounder 2 hours ago [-]
No, Dario became too tiresome and annoying that someone had to do something. Personally I hope they ban Opus too. It will only provide more support for open models development.
Compare Dario horror posts with this from GLM release:
“ Intelligence should be open, accessible, and ready to build with, empowering every developer, everywhere.”
bugbubug 1 hours ago [-]
[dead]
ricointhemood 1 hours ago [-]
[dead]
2 hours ago [-]
testfrequency 1 hours ago [-]
Digg
ortekk 28 minutes ago [-]
With deluge of Chinese models popping up recently, I believe there's a few issues one needs to evaluate before deciding to use these models:
- Ethics. As known, ou American frontier AI companies are incredibly ethical. And I have yet to see any interviews or blog posts by Chinese companies where they talk about how they are ethical, or at least credible HN comments about it.
- Safety. Do they covertly sabotage or at least refuse to answer questions that could help cyber- and bioterrorists in their nefarious purposes? What about ML-related questions that could help terrorists create AI models without guardrails?
- Child safety. This is especially important with "free for all" open-weight models, most of which are Chinese (ever think about why that's the case?). How are we going to do age verification and KYC with models that anyone can just download on their computer?
- Intellectual property theft. How can we be sure that no output of our American frontier AI models was used while training these Chinese models?
Frankly, there's a plethora of other issues I don't have time to get into right now. Personally, I believe distribution of Chinese models in the US should be paused until they are required to submit models to the government for review and evaluation, to make sure they are made to Anthropic/OpenAI standards.
We need legal grounds for that.
Write to your congressman, congresswoman or congressperson and urge them to stop proliferation of dangerous non-American intelligence. This is a matter of national security and needs to be acted upon as soon as possible, preferably before IPO.
Xiol 17 minutes ago [-]
So hard to tell what is satire and what isn't these days.
Aldipower 19 minutes ago [-]
Yes, please ban all Chinese models in the US and stick to your US-centric stuff. Good for the rest of the world.
cyber_kinetist 19 minutes ago [-]
> our American frontier AI companies are incredibly ethical
Ah... sweet summer child.
> Intellectual property theft. How can we be sure that no output of our American frontier AI models was used while training these Chinese models?
The US AI models are already using pirated copyrighted material off the Internet. If Chinese models also do this, they're at least giving it back to the people by releasing their weights as open source.
foxindustrial 21 minutes ago [-]
_incredibly ethical_
jauntywundrkind 9 minutes ago [-]
Fear Uncertainty and Doubt, the terrormongering, is worse than the terrors. Endless denial of society & possibility & progress: begone you demons.
19 minutes ago [-]
tiahura 21 minutes ago [-]
Is this a parody of the Chinese-funded anti-datacenter astroturfing?
billyjobob 20 minutes ago [-]
This is great but sails far too close to Poe's Law that I predict downvotes.
somenameforme 4 minutes ago [-]
I missed it at first. Then reread it, and wow - this is grade A satire of the sort rarely delivered anymore, probably indeed because of exactly what you're saying.
Rendered at 18:26:20 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
"Many users praise Zhipu for open-sourcing GLM-5.2 under MIT with a 1M context window as a major step for accessible AI, while others respond with insults and anti-Chinese hostility."
It is official; Netcraft now confirms: BSD is dying
This is around when people were predicting a new GLM to come out, so a couple corners clipped in order to catch the moment. I'm using it right now and it seems decent, but I haven't done heavy work with it yet. The expanded context window is great.
You think they were sitting on a release waiting for the right marketing moment?
I have seen enough OpenAI and Anthropic carefuly timed marketing plays to expect it.
I would never announce GLM 5.2 in the same day as Fable or Apple's WWDC, for example.
- Ethics. As known, ou American frontier AI companies are incredibly ethical. And I have yet to see any interviews or blog posts by Chinese companies where they talk about how they are ethical, or at least credible HN comments about it.
- Safety. Do they covertly sabotage or at least refuse to answer questions that could help cyber- and bioterrorists in their nefarious purposes? What about ML-related questions that could help terrorists create AI models without guardrails?
- Child safety. This is especially important with "free for all" open-weight models, most of which are Chinese (ever think about why that's the case?). How are we going to do age verification and KYC with models that anyone can just download on their computer?
- Intellectual property theft. How can we be sure that no output of our American frontier AI models was used while training these Chinese models?
Frankly, there's a plethora of other issues I don't have time to get into right now. Personally, I believe distribution of Chinese models in the US should be paused until they are required to submit models to the government for review and evaluation, to make sure they are made to Anthropic/OpenAI standards.
We need legal grounds for that.
Write to your congressman, congresswoman or congressperson and urge them to stop proliferation of dangerous non-American intelligence. This is a matter of national security and needs to be acted upon as soon as possible, preferably before IPO.
Ah... sweet summer child.
> Intellectual property theft. How can we be sure that no output of our American frontier AI models was used while training these Chinese models?
The US AI models are already using pirated copyrighted material off the Internet. If Chinese models also do this, they're at least giving it back to the people by releasing their weights as open source.