5 ms·

It's okay, nothing exceptional, but any news from non US and non Chinese models is still good news.

• pb7 5mo ago
  This is the bar for Europe, huh?
  • saulapremium 5mo ago
    [flagged]
    • pb7 5mo ago
      The fact that this comment is still up hours later but my comment below participating in the discussion got flagged should tell one everything they need to know about the intellectual rigor here.
      • saulapremium 5mo ago
        Oh it's flagged as well, and I admit that it was low effort. But your comment served no purpose besides from provocation, and I guess it worked.
  • amunozo 5mo ago
    This is the bar for anybody that's not the frontier labs.
  • locknitpicker 5mo ago
    > This is the bar for Europe, huh? A few months ago China was being criticized left and right on how somehow it was not able to compete, and once DeepSeek showed up then all the hatred shifted onto how China was actually competing but exploring unfair competitive advantages. Funny how that works. Also, aren't the likes of OpenAI burning through over $2 of investment for each $1 of revenue?
    • pb7 5mo ago
      [flagged]
      • sagacity 5mo ago
        Ah yes, like those EUV machines America and China have worked on.
      • locknitpicker 5mo ago
        > China is not competing, it is distilling US models. I think you should check your notes. The likes of Kimi K2 thinking shows up as high as the second best general purpose model currently in existence. It seems they compete just fine. If you believe "distilling" is all it takes to put together a model at the top of any synthetic benchmark then I wonder what you would have to say about all US models that greatly underperform in comparison and still manage to be used extensively in professional settings. But your argument is an emotional one and not rarional, isn't it?
        • wasfgwp 5mo ago
          > high as the second best general purpose model According to benchmarks which are gamed to the extreme these days. Trusting them blindly isn’t exactly rational either. They don’t necessarily translate that well to real world tasks It’s obviously not “distilling” as such but there are reasons why Chinnese models are consistently several months behind OpenAI/Antropic
          • 2ndorderthought 5mo ago
            [dead]
      • tirpen 5mo ago
        > China is not competing, it is distilling US models China are cheating by using data obtained without permission to train their models in an evil commie way! They should have done what the US did instead and trained models on data obtained without permission in a fair and freedum way! > Where are the Chinese models that are blowing US ones out of the water? Kimi2 blows every US model out of the water in any comparison that includes both costs and performance.
  • deaux 5mo ago
    Where are the competitive models from Singapore, Japan, Taiwan, Korea, Russia, Canada, India, the UK? From anywhere that isn't China or the US? There are none. Mistral Small 4 is pareto-competitive in its pricing bracket at $0.15/$0.60, at worst it's second to Gemma 4 26B A4B. The above countries have never had a model that is even close to being so. This particular Mistral Medium looks to be uncompetitive at that pricing. I'm surprised it's so expensive given its size. Wonder if we'll see other providers offer it for cheaper. but that doesn't mean Mistral has never produced anything useful.
    • class4behavior 5mo ago
      Although the Manus decision might change things for AI, Singapore-washing is quite rampant among Chinese companies, so I wouldn't call this place of origin an alternative market.
    • argsnd 5mo ago
      DeepMind, which is headquartered in London, probably had a significant role in the development of the Gemini and Gemma models. Yes, it might be a problem that the UK allows companies like this to be bought up by foreign countries.
      • wasfgwp 5mo ago
        Without Google’s funding its not obvious i DeepMind would have went anywhere. Unless the moved to US for funding while keeping a back office in the UK. It’s strange to expect anything significant to come out from Europe when VCs there are either very risk averse and/or don’t have enough cash to begin with. It’s not like government or EU funding can replace that since its almost always wasted or missdirected
        • argsnd 5mo ago
          It’s a company containing such remarkable talent that I’m sure they would not have run into significant issues raising capital on international markets. It’s not like VCs are only allowed to invest in companies in their own country.
  • deleted 5mo ago
    [deleted]
  • wg0 5mo ago
    [flagged]
    • gadders 5mo ago
      [flagged]
      • 2ndorderthought 5mo ago
        [flagged]
  • Matl 5mo ago
    I mean, at least we're not melting the planet trying to predict the next token that sounds about right.
    • pb7 5mo ago
      Europeans use AI as much as anyone else.
      • Matl 5mo ago
        Yes, but it would seem that Chinese models are much more efficiently trained than the US ones, (i.e. with fewer resources). Europe doesn't invest nowhere near as much as the US does into tech, so we need to either figure out how to be at least as, and hopefully more, efficient as the Chinese models are (at least in terms of training) or there's little point in trying. I suspect this is one of the reasons why Mistral's models are somewhat struggling; i.e. US style training costs, but nowhere near as much cash as OpenAI/Anthopic have. There are multiple European Google alternatives as well for example, but being 80% as good just doesn't cut it. Chinese models win because they are 95-98% as good as the SotA US ones but at a fraction of the cost.
      • troyvit 5mo ago
        They actually don't use AI as much as a lot of other regions: https://www.visualcapitalist.com/mapped-ai-adoption-across-europe/ https://www.visualcapitalist.com/mapped-ai-adoption-across-e...