Totally! This with DwarfStar delivers usable local AI (I hope!)

Usable local AI has been here for a while, esp on say a 5090.

You can’t treat Qwen3.6 like its fable, but if you prompt precisely and specifically it’s a great executor.

I actually found it refreshing to use more of my brain for once, and actually have to think deeper about what I’m trying to do, and how to build it.

What are your goalposts? Depending on your requirements, there have been many moments of usable local AI. More recent ones were gpt-oss 120b and Qwen 3.6 27b.

Parent is referring to https://github.com/antirez/ds4

Deepseek and moonshot are the only two providers I consent to training for.

Xi going to shut down open-weighting of them in a matter of months. No one seriously doubts this. They will be too powerful and they will be gone.

What would the benefit of this be? If China stops open weights, US labs still have the intelligence frontier. Maybe once Chinese models have speed, cost, and intelligence beat but right now they don't.

Undermining out entire economy by subsidizing the release of DIY versions of our main economic drive sounds like a huge win for China.

> Maybe once Chinese models have speed, cost, and intelligence beat but right now they don't.

Yes this is why I referred to 'months' and was downvoted by people who can't distinguish their politics from reality. You are restating exactly the text you are criticizing.

This is the nature of mechanical parrotlike repetition of propaganda:

a) You can have 'frontier' models with closed weights. Your sentence is basically a contraction within itself, again, the weight of ideology.

b) No one actually knows whether or not the closed weights of Bytedance are beyond all existing frontiers. Again the weight of ideology blinds you to the fact that the real 800 lb gorilla of Chinese Ai is more closed than Anthropic.

The latest ByteDance Seed model is behind Opus 4.6 in performance. It’s not even in the conversation atm.

The parent made a totally coherent commment that China closing off their open weight models would cede the frontier (and majority of AI users worldwide) to the USA. Nothing you said counters that point.

Bytedance models completely pervade business use across China. It is the OpenAI of China, whether you think its a good model or not.

If they did have a super powerful secret AI why would avoid:

1. Selling access to the US? 2. Ship more and better software? 3. Talk about it publicly?

If you had a secret AI better than anything currently available the mere mention of this would crater the US tech investment sentiment.

They could even host these Chinese models through AWS and sell at-cost inference on Bedrock and obliterate the US model companies.

What makes you state this?

China bad

I'm a) quoting Xi's speech and b) projecting rapid China development to Mythos level. Either you think China will never get to 'Mythos level' because you think China bad; or you think they will release the weights, because you think China bad. Its incredible the weight of ideology over facts in this discourse

You haven't quoted anything actually. Provide sources to your claims.

Decades of xenophobic propaganda

No, reading Xi's speech. They aren't going to give their Mythos - presumably a few months away - to the Sinaloa cartel or Uighur hackers or the US military or etc etc

They have already released their models (GLM 5.2 and K3). This is why Amodei and the rest of the effective altruist lobbies are trying to pressure the US government to both ban open-source models and pressure China to do the same.

I’m curious to see why you’re so eager to ban open-source LLMs while being okay with Anthropic’s control. Do you think they’ll rebel against you?

Mythos is Fable without safeguards. Open weight models are already essentially at the Mythos level, and with extra post training a well resourced actor could deploy would almost certainly be significantly better than Mythos at hacking. Whatever their threshold is, it's much higher than that.

Kimi K3 outcompetes Fable on some benchmarks and is not only open weight and open source but they even publish their research and methdology on arXiv

Wow! Amazing observation! Wait, do you think there could have been any pro Chinese propaganda? Perhaps even some taking place at the present time? I think it could be possible?

I'm sure there's plenty, but if you put on your rational hat and think about the motivations of the Chinese government you'll realize this claim makes no sense, and there's plenty of evidence and good reason saying the opposite

you are probably right! nobody does more domestic discourse shaping than China, but good reason says none of that would take place externally

You’re clearly too far gone to even fathom the thought; so you grasp at these straws for hope that the China you grew up “learning” about is the same in reality.

Reuters was reporting that rumor. And then Xi made a public appearance at a conference in Shanghai where he said the opposite of that rumor.

No in that very speech Xi stated explicitly what amounted to: 'of course when we get a Mythos, it will be a state secret'.

In fact the overwhelming weight of AI use in China, the chatgpt so to say, is Bytedance's AI which is absolutely closed and uniquely opaque.

The press treatment of these matters was no good and they are slowly walking it back, e.g. NYT yesterday finally actually read the speech.

Do you have a source for that? The NYT article does not quote Xi making that statement, and I can't find a source for that. In fact, Xi delivered veiled criticism of the security posturing the US has done:

> We should put in place laws and regulations, technological monitoring, early warning and emergency response systems in order to strengthen the line of security, prevent abuses and malicious use, and ensure that AI is always under human control. In the meantime, we should jointly oppose overstretching the national security concept in the field of AI and placing one country’s security over that of others.

There was a blog post by a state-linked broadcaster cited in the NYT piece:

> “China supports openness, but this does not mean it advocates for the unconditional proliferation of all capabilities,” the blog said.

The article also quoted an American journalist:

> “If these models do reach those dangerous capabilities, they are not going to let it be a free-for-all in terms of releasing them," Mr. Sheehan said.

But a distinction has to be drawn between real dangers (which many people believe LLMs have not actually shown, to date) versus "dangers" hyped up marketing purposes or domestic regulatory-capture motives. Presumably the Chinese government is less interested in the latter.

"Dangers" may indeed be hyped up for marketing purposes or domestic regulatory-capture motives. But as Xi stated, they will become real.

It is just a question of being unaffected by the motives of the speakers, which is what adults learn to do.

replying the request for sources with "as xi stated" without bringing the sources again is quite misleading. It seems you have nothing to back what you are saying.

"google is your friend"

The person I am replying to actually believes that Xi actually spoke of "open weights", for example. This is the AI information space we live in.

> But as Xi stated, they will become real.

But the speech doesn't say that? I'm looking at the full text. For example:

> We should take seriously the various types of inherent and secondary risks that AI may trigger.

The risk portion of the speech is focused more on application-level risks than model capabilities. Which is a much more sensible regulatory framing than what Silicon Valley has proposed.

The claim that the speech was somehow supporting open weights was pure Western imposition. China does not support open weights generally, and Xi makes plain that some systems of weights - perhaps still future - would have inherent risks, same as Amodei says of Mythos, whether or not he is bull_ing about it.

He just straight up did not say that or anything similar to that.

It is true. And only Chinese Han people can continue work on what is already released. But they will be forbidden. /s

Sarcasm aside - if the community can't get their shit together to continue improving what is currently public, well - we don't deserve free stuff and open weights.

That isn't the Chinese way. They are much more focused on undermine and extinguish. Just look at the European car industry- on its way to being non-existent after the market was flooded, bye bye manufacturing base. Undercut the US AI providers and wait them out, they will go private after they have a stranglehold

> Undercut the US AI providers and wait them out

You could have said the same of linux - that it extinguished proprietary OSs at least for server usecases.

true, but the motivations of OSS contributors are benign (overall)

Even Xi's speech was as paranoid as Dario Amodei about the possibility of Chinese AI achieving something at the level of say Mythos. If you seriously believe such a thing will be on Hugging Face I really don't know what to say.

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 scores higher than Fable 5 on Terminal-Bench, and Fable 5 is Mythos, correct?

There is already something on HuggingFace at the level of Mythos. It's called Kimi K3 and it's running laps around Opus5, Fable5, and Sol56 at cybersecurity.

It's so good that the US government is rushing to ban all Chinese models as fast as they can.

Fine, you believe Anthropic was lying about Mythos. In fact no view of the matter is needed to formulate the proposition above. It is clear China will soon have a model with the powers imputed to Mythos but which you deny of actual Mythos. It is a trial to deal with this level of ideological blindness; 'ideology has no outside'. If someone says 'when they get Mythos...', declare the possibility of Mythos to be the real lie. But it is quite possible and will be coming in months.

Reading between the lines, it's fairly clear that Mythos Preview only got its reported results in offensive cyber thanks to a highly specialized harness and humongous amounts of test-time compute. We also don't know what kind of post-training/fine-tuning it got on cyber, Anthropic only stated that it wasn't specifically trained for cyber-offense but that leaves a lot of scope for training on other related things. Overall, the Mythos story is a lot less interesting than most people might like to claim - but note that this doesn't require any actual lying.

The interest around K3 is a lot more defensible because we actually know what the architecture looks like, how much effort it takes to get it to run, and what kinds of results it gets on cyber evaluations. And no, it's nowhere near "dangerous" enough to where people might honestly want to ban it for real safety reasons. It does a good enough job at fixing cyber issues, but that's hardly a safety concern.

They're not even really undercutting the US right now. They are releasing their models for free. There's plenty of US businesses who's entire existence is hosting these open source models that they didn't pay any Chinese company a single dime for. If anything they're helping create a less centralized and healthier American market

We can only wait to see if this is true. Another possibility could be that it was an answer to USA's government considering a ban on chinese models. In this way, he fueled the discussion around the importance of open weight models.

Xi actually said that models of the strength to pose security issues will be permanent state secrets -- in the same speech that the first western takes translated as actually using the words 'open weights' which of course nowhere appeared. Now: when will "models of the strength to pose security issues" appear? Maybe my inference 'months' is wrong, but they seem to be advancing rapidly.

The administration blather about banning open weights is characteristically confused. Xi has already stated (what is obvious) that he will ban security-endangering weights and keep them a state secret.

He explicitly said he wants open weight models at his recent speech at an AI conference in Shanghai: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48970449#48970784

The Chinese equivalent of the expression 'open weights' appears nowhere in this talk. You believed the Western press. Chinese AIs are not typically open. The most important by far is Bytedance.

The second China shuts down open weights is the second they lose the AI race. Nobody is going to use Chinese models if they're closed, besides hobbyists who don't have anything they care about getting stolen.

Openness not open weight. You keep saying this and that was said while not quoting anything, not sure why anyone should take your comments here seriously.

Me.

He literally just announced WAICO to make a framework to allow for open source LLMs for disadvantaged countries for the foreseeable future

Why not also Qwen?

Qwen/Alibaba have stopped doing open weights releases for a while. No grudge or anything, I'm certainly not going to look at a gift horse in the mouth, but both DeepSeek and Moonshot have been very consistent with open weights as well as sharing actually detailed research.

In terms of open research, China has absolutely overtaken the US.

Qwen has a pinned tweet stating that 3.8 will be released as open weights soon. I guess it remains to be seen, though, if they’ll do the smaller model sizes or only the big 2.4T one.

Most interesting part IMO is whatever Qwen open weight will include image / video capabilities since its where they are strongest.

Also base models versions are very useful for researchers, since they allow for a cold start to post training.

CCP will be happy! Go on and share all your data with them..

Yeah, because, your data is best collected by the US labs, right?

US or American, don't trust anyone, these are open weight models. Host them yourself if you feel strongly about privacy (as you should). I honestly don't know of any OSS open weight models from the US labs as good as Kimi K3 or Deepseek V4 though.

Yes, they trained on my open source code and Wikipedia edits and Stack Overflow answers that I shared freely, so it's only fair that they release their models as open source and share back to the community that created them. I only allow my training data go to open source models.

Yeah, at least when I share my training data with labs releasing their models openly (Chinese or American or otherwise) it's nominally so an even better open model will land in my hands in the future.

I’m developing open source tools, so happy to have all my context traces be public if it helps improve future models.

At least you get based models back at some point. You supply data, they supply compute and open weights.

I will! I pay their sales too and consider it quite reasonable.

Yes I will tyvm.

They release the models back for free.

CCP isn’t causing global economic crisis by bombing and invading foreign countries.

There is no telling how much worse US will get as they start to lose more and more internationally and grow the wealth inequality locally.

It is easy to be liberalist and cool when winning but it doesn’t mean there isn’t a racist, uneducated and violent majority

hope that deepseek become better

Have you tried the one that was just released?

Starting to wonder if the free big pickle model on opencode has been DSV4F0731 for the past few months. It’s been incredibly fast and good.

At least in the past it was GLM-4.6. IDK if it is ever changed.

https://github.com/anomalyco/opencode/issues/4276

I’ve heard that too, but since it’s a stealth model, I suspect they change it to whatever preview model provider that offers a free endpoint. In the past few months, I’ve gotten 4xx errors identifying the provider as DeepSeek.

  > Whatever capabilities they get, can be used "forever" going forward.

"Forever" gets the scare quotes because it is implied only up until the Butlerian Jihad?

I upvoted you just for the Dune reference.

I feel like once they make a mega successful movie of a book we can stop doing the secret handshake.

Especially when the movie is over forty years old.

I don't think 1984 dune was successful culturally or financially. Definitely a different beast from the recent attempt, which has been wildly popular.

The only movie I've ever enjoyed after reading the book was Jurassic Park. I've never seen the Dune movies or most other book-based movies, but honestly The Martian and Project Hail Mary were tempting. I'll probably surrender to one of those two someday.

The most recent Dune movies pull off the incredible feat of being a better telling of the tale than the book, but only if you already know the tale from the books. They’re not beginner-friendly, but they’re extremely respectful to the book reader, while still make conscious (and in my opinion, positive) changes to the story.

Thank you. Maybe I'll read Dune again (or listen to an audiobook) then watch.

That sounds exactly like the type of experience I'd enjoy.

I might disagree with this. To me, the joy of the books was developing a deep understanding of the societies and their norms. This felt almost entirely missing from the movies, which focused more on events. This is fine--they're different mediums, after all, but the second movie in particular left me a little disappointed.

I think this is kind of my point -- there's no way to develop that level of nuance in a movie. The options are to take way more time (see Silo), to do a crappy job (see... almost every 2 - 3 hour movie), or to instead change the goal: Don't have the viewer "develop… a deep understanding", but down-select to those viewers who already respect the work and have that deep understanding, and instead focus on showing them the society and its norms. Do what movies are great at -- make a story come to life -- and make the viewer/reader do the work of knowing the background, knowing what they're seeing, knowing what's important.

I grew up on Dune lore and the first movie is one of my favorites of all time. Highly recommended for any Dune fan. I didn't care for the second one.

OP refers to details from the book that are not in either film.

“Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a human mind”…

distilling K3 into DS4 flash will likely only be a good idea for specialists. the difference in model capacity is otherwise too large.

we used to distill GLM 5.2 into Qwen 27B specialists with great success.

developing the workflows is tricky though. we had the advantage of a straightforward mapping function in mind: English -> SQL which was relatively easy to pipeline training for.

Why would you do this?

a specialist model sufficiently post-trained can outperform a frontier model while being dirt cheap.

what we did was distill GLM 5.2 into a 27B model on SQL and then post-train it with RL afterward. the result outperformed even Fable on that one task. the distillation step is just good sense in this workflow, to bootstrap a smaller model to the utmost you can before actually doing RL.

Do you have any reference guides on how to perform this distillation? I have a use case for this and hardware to run it on, but have never seen how it's done.

nothing publicly available that I'm aware of.