News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Qwen3-Max-Thinking by behnamoh on Monday January 26, 2026 @12:17PM (#46768408)
> Why is this surprising?

Because the promise of "open-source" (which this isn't; it's not even open-weight) is that you get something that proprietary models don't offer.

If I wanted censored models I'd just use Claude (heavily censored).

Re:Qwen3-Max-Thinking by denysvitali on Monday January 26, 2026 @12:19PM (#46768440)
What the properietary models don't offer is... their weights. No one is forcing you to trust their training data / fine tuning, and if you want a truly open model you can always try Apertus (https://www.swiss-ai.org/apertus).
Re:Qwen3-Max-Thinking by kouteiheika on Monday January 26, 2026 @12:56PM (#46769078)
> Because the promise of "open-source" (which this isn't; it's not even open-weight) is that you get something that proprietary models don't offer. If I wanted censored models I'd just use Claude (heavily censored).

You're saying it's surprising that a proprietary model is censored because the promise of open-source is that you get something that proprietary models don't offer, but you yourself admit that this model is neither open-source nor even open-weight?

Re:Qwen3-Max-Thinking by croes on Monday January 26, 2026 @02:00PM (#46769992)
I can open source any heavily censored software. Open source doesn’t mean uncensored.