3 ms·
The apparent bias may be explainable as it’s not remarkable for OpenAI or Anthropic to be slightly ahead. It _is_ remarkable for an open weights model to be bet
by rogerrogerr 2mo ago
The apparent bias may be explainable as it’s not remarkable for OpenAI or Anthropic to be slightly ahead. It _is_ remarkable for an open weights model to be better than the closed models from the trillion dollar (allegedly) companies.
- the_sleaze_ 2mo agoI believe the Chinese government is angling to destroy the western economy and rise from the ashes. Instead of a billion a day to bomb some buildings and bridges they're intentionally hamstringing the biggest concentration of speculation in history
- malshe 2mo agoI agree. The commenter you replied to makes it sound like the Chinese models are coming out of tiny startups with meager resources. It's really not a David vs Goliath story.
- rogerrogerr 2mo agoIt’s not about who’s developing the models, it’s the fact that free alternatives that are neck-and-neck are available at all. What’s the story for OpenAI & Anthropic’s valuation if they have to compete against free-weight models? Starts to feel like a commodity.
- omnimus 2mo agoIs it? From what i could find Anthropic and OpenAI are hovering around 5000 employees where as Deepseek and Moonshot are more like 300. The funding/investments are similarly many times less. I agree that 300 employees is not a small company but the overall outlook for Anthropic/OpenAI is not geat.