3 ms·

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.

darkwater 2mo ago
What makes you state this?
- baublet 2mo ago
  China bad
  - applicative 2mo ago
    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
    - satvikpendem 2mo ago
      You haven't quoted anything actually. Provide sources to your claims.
- riskd 2mo ago
  Decades of xenophobic propaganda
  - 1234letshaveatw 2mo ago
    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?
    - Zetaphor 2mo ago
      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
      - 1234letshaveatw 2mo ago
        you are probably right! nobody does more domestic discourse shaping than China, but good reason says none of that would take place externally
    - riskd 2mo ago
      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.
  - applicative 2mo ago
    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
    - h8hawk 2mo ago
      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?
    - sudosysgen 2mo ago
      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.
    - culi 2mo ago
      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
gravypod 2mo ago
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.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- applicative 2mo ago
  > 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.
  - ricardobeat 2mo ago
    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.
    - applicative 2mo ago
      Bytedance models completely pervade business use across China. It is the OpenAI of China, whether you think its a good model or not.
  - gravypod 2mo ago
anon373839 2mo ago
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.
- applicative 2mo ago
  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.
  - anon373839 2mo ago
    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.
    - applicative 2mo ago
      "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.
ReptileMan 2mo ago
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.
1234letshaveatw 2mo ago
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
- applicative 2mo ago
  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.
  - criley2 2mo ago
    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.
    - applicative 2mo ago
      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.
      - zozbot234 2mo ago
        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.
GTP 2mo ago
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.
- applicative 2mo ago
  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.
satvikpendem 2mo ago
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 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48970449#48970784
- applicative 2mo ago
  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.
  - Petersipoi 2mo ago
    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.
  - satvikpendem 2mo ago
    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.
codemk8 2mo ago
Me.
culi 2mo ago
He literally just announced WAICO to make a framework to allow for open source LLMs for disadvantaged countries for the foreseeable future

darkwater 2mo ago

What makes you state this?

baublet 2mo ago
China bad
- applicative 2mo ago
  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
  - satvikpendem 2mo ago
    You haven't quoted anything actually. Provide sources to your claims.
riskd 2mo ago
Decades of xenophobic propaganda
- 1234letshaveatw 2mo ago
  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?
  - Zetaphor 2mo ago
    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
    - 1234letshaveatw 2mo ago
      you are probably right! nobody does more domestic discourse shaping than China, but good reason says none of that would take place externally
  - riskd 2mo ago
    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.
- applicative 2mo ago
  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
  - h8hawk 2mo ago
    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?
  - sudosysgen 2mo ago
    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.
  - culi 2mo ago
    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

gravypod 2mo ago

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.

deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
applicative 2mo ago
> 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.
- ricardobeat 2mo ago
  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.
  - applicative 2mo ago
    Bytedance models completely pervade business use across China. It is the OpenAI of China, whether you think its a good model or not.
- gravypod 2mo ago

anon373839 2mo ago

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.

applicative 2mo ago
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.
- anon373839 2mo ago
  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.
  - applicative 2mo ago
    "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.

ReptileMan 2mo ago

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.

1234letshaveatw 2mo ago

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

applicative 2mo ago
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.
- criley2 2mo ago
  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.
  - applicative 2mo ago
    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.
    - zozbot234 2mo ago
      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.

GTP 2mo ago

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.

applicative 2mo ago
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.

satvikpendem 2mo ago

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 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48970449#48970784

applicative 2mo ago
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.
- Petersipoi 2mo ago
  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.
- satvikpendem 2mo ago
  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.

codemk8 2mo ago

Me.

culi 2mo ago

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