all 96 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [S] 67 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (11 children)

Just a day ago, a senior Anthropic executive claimed the U.S. still held a 6 to 9 month lead in frontier AI models, while calling Chinese model distillation adversarial. One day later, Moonshot’s Kimi K3 beat Claude Fable 5 on Frontend Code Arena. And the funniest part is that it is an open weight model.

So the whole 6 to9 month lead lasted about 24 hours. 🤣

https://hai.stanford.edu/news/inside-the-ai-index-12-takeaways-from-the-2026-report

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Tbf they (Moonshot) claim it’s not as good as Fable overall. Fable is also held back by US government mandated guards. Anthropic could well be ahead by a lot in terms of research and maybe we just don’t have the full picture. But that puts them in an even worse spot because it would mean they’re already at the limit of what they can compete with in the market.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] [S] 16 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    I think the big picture here is that the difference in quality is largely subjective at this point, while US companies are burning through orders of magnitude of cash which is obviously not sustainable. We shouldn't underestimate the power of developing things in the open. Chinese open models benefit from the wisdom of an entire global research community while American engineers working on proprietary closed models are working in their own insular silos. It should be no surprise that the scientific community at large would pull ahead of these small teams. On top of that, doing research in the open amortizes the cost. Incidentally, this is exactly the same logic that led open source to dominate in recent years.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    OpenAIs bet was that compute was the limiting factor. Sam Altman claimed that essentially no-one could obtain the level of compute necessary to develop something like GPT-4. Then Deepseek came out.

    They're still trying to make the original claim true because if they admit that they were wrong (or full of shit) it all comes crashing down, not just their companies but likely the economy as a whole.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    The irony is that the original OpenAI thesis was correct. Use a datacenter to generate a frontier model, then distribute that AI openly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Yeah, it was absolutely correct. Doing so was the only sensible things. Generate the model, release it with open weights. Instead they got greedy and now we have an arms race that is both dangerous, is crashing the economy and is devastating the environment.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    It doesn’t hurt that American frontier models are phenomenally huge and cost an exorbitant amount per token in and out while the main source of real world value created by llms in the past year has been through agentic/harness/other words for massive context systems that show a real benefit from simply using more tokens.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 35 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    Why are there so many pictures of Sam Altman just Looking Like That?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 3 months ago (65 children)

    First bomb they've dropped in 50 years, wow.

  • source
  • hideshow 65 child comments
  • [+] -10 points 3 months ago (64 children)

    check notes

    Uhhhh not sure about bombing, but they went straight to clubbing people to death.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020%E2%80%932021_China%E2%80%93India_skirmishes

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 64 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (63 children)

    Lmao, how many people died? Honestly?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 63 child comments
  • [+] -10 points 3 months ago (62 children)

    Aren't you nonconfrontational?

    Is clubbing people to death something you excuse, but only for China!?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 62 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    "Clubbing people to death"

    looks inside

    "A fight between soldiers that could have spiralled into a war with guns but didn't, and fewer people died than your average Friday night drunk driving pileup.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    I am very glad cooler heads prevailed.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (57 children)

    How many people were killed in this brutal war that must have left countless dead in its wake?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 57 child comments
  • [+] -9 points 3 months ago (56 children)

    A single death is too much, unless it is China.

    What a goober.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 56 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (55 children)
  • [+] -7 points 3 months ago (54 children)

    Stop pretending you give a duck.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 54 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (53 children)
  • [+] -7 points 3 months ago (52 children)

    How many Chinese soldiers beat to death for building a road too close to them!?

    It is almost like there was this thing called a link that you can you use to learn for yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 52 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (51 children)

    Is that what we were talking about?

    I thought you were talking about Indian soldiers being beat to death by Chinese clubs, and I thought I asked you for a total number of deaths. I'm still waiting for that, by the way!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 51 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 3 months ago (50 children)
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (49 children)

    And the number of people killed in this horrific war should be easy for you to answer yawn

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 49 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 3 months ago (48 children)

    Just another murder apologist sigh

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 48 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (47 children)

    ANY NUMBER, TELL ME A NUMBER, ARE YOU AFRAID TO SAY A NUMBER?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 47 child comments
  • [+] -8 points 3 months ago* (46 children)

    Murder doesn't matter as long as China does it.

    -Nonconfrontational 2026

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 46 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (45 children)

    I can't count to 12

    -doomsider 2026

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 45 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 3 months ago* (44 children)

    Only 12 people murdered? How did you come up with this number. Do you think their wives and children were cool with their fathers being murdered?

    Another human rights abuser identified.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 44 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (43 children)

    Is that the number you're citing as a war crime? 12?

    12?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 43 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 3 months ago (42 children)

    Attacking road builders isn't a war crime!?

    Found the War Crime apologist.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 42 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (38 children)

    The clash was between soldiers after objections to the road being built not with the builders?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 38 child comments
  • [+] -6 points 3 months ago (37 children)

    Found another one.

    China was of course the aggressor and the lack of arms pretty much discounts this as military action. These were the equivalent of army engineers, not soldiers.

    Once again the points stands, China has not dropped a single bomb in fifty years. Of course they have supplied plenty of bombs that were used to kill people, but I digress.

    Beating each other to death with clubs makes this all better you see.

    I could only imagine the massacre if the US would have been involved, thank goodness they were not.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 37 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    "Army engineers aren't soldiers actually"

    Is it hard to be so stupid?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago* (4 children)

    Do you not know there are non-combat positions!?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago* (3 children)

    Every single person who joins the military receives combat training and is considered a valid military target by all laws of war.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    If you think slaughtering engineers is acceptable when not at war time then we clearly have different standards.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 child)

    Stop pretending to clutch your pearls bro, when you join the military you accept death as a possibility. Don't act like those cringe Israelis who say shit like "Hamas terrorists kidnapped my cousin from inside his tank"

    "Slaughtering" what a whiny way to say they got into a fight and lost lmao. I hope you're not this self-victimizing in your personal life, or people will stop texting you back.

    Basically what I'm saying is stop pretending to be caring when it's obvious you're just greasy and holding some weird grudge

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (30 children)

    China was of course the aggressor

    China was defending it's sovereignty. If America decided to simply start building whatever it wanted in northern Mexico or Russia simply decided to start building whatever it liked in Eastern Ukraine pre2022 I'm sure youd be raving about how terrible it was.

    lack of arms pretty much discounts this as military action. These were the equivalent of army engineers, not soldiers.

    Except this is nonsense and really shows how little you understand of the situation. The lack of arms is due to the "Agreement Between the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on Confidence-Building Measures in the Military Field Along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in the India-China Border Areas" signed by both countries in 1996.

    Once again the points stands

    It really doesn't

    Of course they have supplied plenty of bombs that were used to kill people, but I digress.

    The global south being able to arm itself in the face of the largest most expansive and violent imperial power in history is good actually. Being against all violence equally is simply being for the status quo and the status quo is built on the massive immiseration of and extraction from the global south to the imperial core.

    Beating each other to death with clubs makes this all better you see.

    Fighting with far less lethal and destructive weapons to settle military disputes is better than bombing and shooting and annihilating entire regions and people's yes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 30 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 3 months ago* (29 children)

    Hey, I totally get you are on China's side, but denying they were the aggressor is a little pathetic.

    Stop trying to fabricate a military action. It is silly, why do you think they fought with clubs. Denialism doesn't look good. Also they did have arms, but they were not armed with guns initially because it was never a combat operation.

    The point doesn't stand? Are you providing evidence China has dropped bombs in the last fifty years. I am all ears.

    I do take offense with your hand waving away China providing arms through their industrial military complex. These weapons frequently end up on both sides of a conflict and cause needless destruction and suffering.

    Also the optics of doing this in Africa are disturbing to say the least. It would almost be better if they were directly selling weapon system to Russia instead of just clandestinely providing Intel, logistics, troops, training, etc. Then it would at least look like they were impartially providing weapons of destruction used to kill civilians.

    Pretending this is merely a battle over imperialist nations is a disservice to what is really going on. Pretending China is not engaging in imperialist behavior by being an arms dealer is also disingenuous.

    There is no doubt the the US is the most destructive nation in history and has corrupted the entire world including China. This is reality.

    I appreciate your recognition that there is no need for escalation. Truly India and China are some of the more traditionally peaceful nations and due to smart negotiations limited their militarization of the border. What is disturbing is what happened. How much stress these humans must be put through to cause this behavior.

    it is clear to me China is turning into a destructive force with their proliferation of their military industrial complex. This isn't the West versus the East or the global North versus the South this is simply a corporation making money from human suffering.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 29 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (28 children)

    You are deluded with no real grasp of reality. Good luck to you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 28 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (27 children)

    Whatever you say to make it okay.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 27 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (26 children)

    I pointed to the treaties, the inciting incident etc. and your response was simply nuh uh followed by a fantasy you cooked up. Fuck off.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] -4 points 3 months ago (25 children)

    You are rude and disingenuous.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (24 children)

    Why would I be polite to you when you have done nothing but lie and act like a smug chauvinist asshole?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 24 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago* (23 children)

    I have done nothing of the sort. Take your rude accusation elsewhere. You are acting like troll, it is disgusting.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 23 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (22 children)

    Says the hindutva troll shilling for the modi union getting to ignore China's sovereignty at their convenience

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 22 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago* (21 children)

    I already explained my position and I am not your made up boogeyman. I have legitimate criticism you can't handle, you should go away since you cannot be civil.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (20 children)

    Your "criticism" was that you imagined it wasn't a military engagement because you didn't know what you were talking about, that China should just let India ignore their sovereignty, that china shouldn't aid the third world in standing up to the global hegemon that's spent well over a century immiserating and exploiting them. Your "criticisms" are privileged nonsense that you should be ashamed of.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (19 children)

    That is not what I said at all. My point was these human beings are being put under an enormous amount of stress which lead to this unnecessary escalation.

    Your hand waving of their industrial military complex selling weapons being used by both sides in Africa to kill civilians is disgusting and they should be ashamed of their actions. It is a disgusting example of imperialism.

    The US and Russia have and still do this and it is wrong as well. No doubt that it is a violation of human rights.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 19 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (18 children)

    Yes yes you love your idealist nonsense I get it you don't have to keep telling me about how you don't take into account material reality.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago (17 children)

    You mean I respect human rights and recognize China along with other countries violate them constantly.

    At this point this is a corporation in China selling death and destruction to Africa for profit. How about you take some responsibility instead of being a apologist for human rights abuses.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (16 children)

    What you are is an apologist for the status quo who has a paper thing understanding of political economy and use human rights as a shield to condemn people calling out your nonsense.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago* (15 children)

    Fact, Chinese military industrial complex companies are selling arms to Africa.

    You are calling me an apologist.. Because I hate the military industrial complex's business model that grows based on human suffering!? Profits for death.

    Let's turn this around. Why do you defend this practice. How do you rationalize arming people and the resulting civilian death.

    This is exactly what the US is doing in Palestine by supplying weapons to Israel. This is exactly what Russia has done in Africa. These countries are playing a bullshit game of Imperialism causing untold suffering.

    But if China does it, it is okay and we can't criticize them!? This is what I mean by disingenuous. This is not about idealism. It is about right and wrong and apparently your denialism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (14 children)

    Continuing to show your paper thin moralist understanding of the world.

    You are assigning a fixed moral category to the abstract act of supplying weapons while stripping away the concrete political relationship. Arms supplied to an occupying power are not equivalent to arms supplied to a state defending its sovereignty. The relevant questions are: who receives the weapons, against whom are they used, and what political purpose do they serve?

    Yes, China exports arms. But supplying Mali or Burkina Faso as they fight US/European bavked jihadist insurgencies is not equivalent to the United States arming Israel or the the RSF (through the UAE). The Sahel’s crisis was intensified by the destruction of Libya and by a regional order shaped by French domination and the CFA-franc system. Treating every arms transfer as morally identical erases the distinction between supporting sovereign resistance and enabling occupation, proxy warfare or mass killing.

    China also does not have a US-style, privately dominated military-industrial complex. Its major defence enterprises are publicly owned and directed according to state defence and foreign-policy objectives. Lockheed Martin and similar firms, by contrast, are privately owned institutions whose structural interest is the continual expansion of military contracts, weapons markets and conflict. Which they then "lobby for", the west's legalised form of corruption.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago* (13 children)

    You are simply defending the military industrial complex's killing of civilians for profit. China is now the world's fourth largest arms supplier by most measures.

    The fact that China's government has compete ownership is even more damning than a government not properly regulating a private defense contractor. At least then they could claim some ignorance to the consequences of arms proliferation.

    I find your argument that China sells arms for the right reason both spurious and ideologically driven. It is not what is happening. What is happening is a corporation is making profit off of human death.

    I get that you don't care. You have a million excuses and frankly I am not buying it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (12 children)

    You are not engaging with the argument. You are assigning a fixed moral meaning to the abstract act of supplying weapons while ignoring who controls them, who receives them, and what they are used for. Calling every arms transfer “profit from death” is just an easy handwave to avoid dealing with reality. It is moralism that erases ownership, state power, class interest, and concrete material conditions.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago* (11 children)

    We already know these weapons end up on both sides of conflicts. You are either ignorant or being disingenuous. If it is the former, here is an article.

    https://www.btl-research.com/p/chinese-weapons-on-both-sides-of

    Due to the way proliferation of arms works you can never ensure your weapons of destruction end up in the right hands, plus you are making a moral decision by deciding which group to arm to begin with. Even if we did give the Chinese MIC the benefit of the doubt they are still aware that they have inadvertently armed both sides.

    I don't buy it as in it is objectively wrong and more disgusting acts of imperialism. You hand wave the civilian death away because you don't care.

    You don't get to choose the argument. I have presented my belief and the facts that are not debatable.

    borcsrt the terms. Because you lack humanity . You are simply wrong in my eyes and that is okay.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (10 children)

    Yeah with every response I'm more sure you are a privileged white pacifist from the imperial core. To be consistent you of course must condemn the ANC, the union in the American civil war and the allies in ww2 for the use and dissemination of weapons. I hope you one day grow up but for now please fuck off

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 3 months ago* (9 children)

    Yes, we already know you don't have an argument so you resort to silly insults that amount to lies and then a generous amount of whataboutism. I am not surprised.

    Edit: for clarity I will gladly condem the US. I have studied human rights most of my life and the US is the greatest offender in my eyes.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    You condemn the union? Wow you are evil. A pro confederacy pacifist now that's a first. Do you also condemn the allies? The ANC? The IRA? The militant unions who won the 8 hour work day and 5 day workweek? and If your answer to any of this is no you have quite the inconsistent position.

    whataboutism

    Nonsense word used by shithead debatebros to avoid comparative argument that would expose their hypocrisy and inconsistencies.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] -2 points 3 months ago

    Calling out actions that causes human suffering could be considered evil I am sure. But only for people who would act like bootlickers to nations and corporations.

    Do I condemn other nations for doing the same things? Yes, of course. You are clearly out if your league living out some campist fantasy. I have no dogs in this fight and I am most critical of the country I am from since I know it the best.

    What does labor unions have to do with this discussion. You are pretty far off the topic unless you can explain your reasoning.

    I can see that the term whataboutism is triggering you. I will refrain from using this loaded language in the future.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (6 children)

    Who's we? You speaking French now?

    None of us here agree with your braindead take lol. Look at the votes if you don't believe me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago (5 children)

    Oh you mean my take isn't popular here!? Oh darn!

    It is not popular amongst most groups of human rights deniers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Marxists : famously anti human rights

    Lmfao.

    You're a joke, man.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago* (3 children)

    I know, that is what has happened to you guys. Sitting around defending shithole countries like China and Russia because they used to be "communist" when in reality they were always oligarchies.

    I know a lot of leftists (myself included) that are disgusted with the state of things.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago
    [–] 4 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Kimi K3 looks insane but it's also very expensive right now, hopefully that changes or I don't see myself using it over the previous models

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (5 children)

    The latest model is K2.7, I can decide what wrote the article. Is it more likely than an Ai did not know 2.7 existed or a journalist at Gizmodo is incompetent?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

    What do you mean by this? The latest model is K3, which was released yesterday.

    Edit: ah I see the reference to K2.6

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    Can we please not write headlines like that when we're on the verge of ww3 and literal bombs might be dropped on the US in the coming months?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 3 months ago (3 children)

    Why not? Do you reall think it matters compared to the wankshite oozing out of their leader's administration's mouths?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Because I thought China had literally bombed the US for a very tense moment before I finished reading the headline. Especially because of how the words wrapped. I didn't need that stress.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    China won't bomb the US out of the blue. Start worrying about it once the US bombs them first.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Imagine a context where the reader is looking at the news for the first time that day. They think they missed news in the morning, perhaps the US starting aggressions, and now China has dropped another bomb.

    I'm sure you can imagine such a scenario

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    If you are still evaluating options, https://api.getapiomni.com/ might be worth a look: one OpenAI-compatible /v1 key across GLM / DeepSeek / Qwen / Kimi, top up from $1, real-time balance, card / Apple Pay / Google Pay / PayPal, no region locks. Kimi K3 via OpenRouter being too costly - direct routes exist for the same model without the aggregator margin.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 3 months ago

    This may explain why there are scrappers hammering the Internet using Alibaba cloud.

  • source