Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Why wouldn't they? It keeps strengthening their position. It's an incredible source of soft power if they're seen as the place to look for good AI, and what's more, you can self-host it or hire a local provider if you're worried about data sovereignty.


I guess it's a possibility, but I don't have that kind of expectations from major world powers. It's not like the CCP is a beacon of human rights either.


‘Why wouldn’t anyone give away frontier AI?’ sounds like ‘why wouldn’t anyone give away uranium enrichment?’ i.e. I can’t comprehend the state of mind and the world model of anyone asking a question like that, which is apparently quite a few folks here on HN!


> Why wouldn’t anyone give away frontier AI?

They already are, to an extent. If we believe Amodei's nutjob take that Mythos/Fable are the end of the world in the wrong hands, we should have an open source Chinese model within 6-12 months that's already end-of-world level, so the cat is going to be way out of the bag long before the US labs go out of business.


> should have an open source Chinese model within 6-12 months that's already end-of-world level

that's the exact thing I'm talking about. I don't see why is half the people around here so sure that China will continue to release anything at all. they are releasing non-frontier models on a 6-month lag, yes, but the reasons why to release them are overshadowed by reasons to not do that for mythos-class models. IOW why would they give away a dual use technology just like that?


> the reasons why to release them are overshadowed by reasons to not do that for mythos-class models

Why? What are those reasons? How come they don't already exist for DeepSeek V4 or GLM-5.2?

By the way, I'm not going to entertain the "mythos-class" phrasing because I really don't think it's important. I don't believe Anthropic's take on it being the threshold towards the end of the world that their marketing insists it is.


DeepSeek v4 and GLM 5.2 are not Mythos-class, the capability uplift as measured is continuous but consequences are step functions.


I didn't say they are. I did say I don't like the phrasing "Mythos-class" because it puts Mythos on a level I don't think it is.


It is on a level above everything else for now, that’s enough to determine it’s quite literally in its own class. Anecdotally it is a good model, sir.


It doesn't seem to be on a level above everything else, no. It seems to be a step increase in some areas and maybe even a decrease in others.

Anectodally, DeepSeek V4 is a very good model as well, sir. I'm not calling anything V4-class because of that.


I’ve been piloting frontier LLMs for as long as anyone outside of the labs and I just disagree. It is a tier above for some tasks (especially in my usage) and not a downgrade on anything I tried it on. This is enough for me to rank it higher; ymmv.


Fair enough!

I've only briefly tried it and it did seem quite capable for what I was doing, but not that much better than the Chinese models I've been mostly using.

In any case, this [0] seems to paint a more reasonable picture than "it's much better than anything else at everything".

[0] https://www.aisi.gov.uk/blog/our-evaluation-of-claude-mythos...


Have you used it? It’s clearly a class above, I had it solve so many things in 3 days, it was ridiculous




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: