Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | xupybd's commentslogin

I've been using GLM 4.7 with opencode.

It is for sure not as good but the generous limits mean that for a price I can afford I can use it all day and that is game changer for me.

I can't use this model yet as they are slowly rolling it out but I'm excited to try it.


Exactly! I don't understand comments claiming GLM-4.7 is very bad.

With New Year's promotional discount, I got Lite coding version for ~3$ per month. I have burned couple dozen million of tokens in a session and 5h allowance barely budged. For what I do on personal time - I will never burn through it[0].

I have Claude Code Opus 4.6 at work - yes GLM-4.7 is not as good, though for personal work on bootstraping some applications - it's excellent.

I feel like it's literally 6-9 months behind SOTA, most expensive LLM tools that my employer was buying for me and my colleagues, for 3$ per month (even if it's 10$ without discount). Will see how it's with GLM-5 when Z.AI lite coding plan will get it, but I feel the gap to SOTA is narrowing and fast.

[0] Though I feel like a stone age neanderthal, when people say they run multiple agents in parallel and burn tens of millions of tokens in minutes.


Have you compared it to GPT? It is a much better model, and unlike Claude you won't easily hit limits on Pro plan.


I think he has rocket company that needs more work.

Sufficient hype funds more work for his rocket company.

The more work they have the faster they can develop the systems to get to Mars. His pet project.

I really think it's that simple.


Starlink and Falcon 9 have been an excellent pairing, Falcon 9 partially reusable rockets created a lot launch capacity and starlink filled the demand. Starship if it meets its goals will create more launch fully reusable supply by orders of magnitude, but there is not the demand for all that launch capacity. Starlink can take some of it but probably not all so they need to find a customer to fill it in order to build up enough to have the volume to eventually colonize mars.


Going to Mars is not a serious goal.

We can tell because it’s not being treated as a serious goal. 100% of the focus is on the big vroom vroom part that’s really exciting to kids who get particularly excited by things that go vroom, and approximately 0% of the focus is on developing all the less glamorous but equally essential components of a successful Mars mission, like making sure the crew stays healthy.


As much as I'd like to see boots on the ground on Mars this is where I'm at. In my uneducated opinion, while building the massive rocket is incredibly difficult, its probably the easiest part of a Mars mission.


Correct, and this is meant to attract the same investors and Bulls that already think Mars colonies is a solved problem, just need a few more years to run some tests. As with all, it is only about making himself richer.


> colonize mars

Oh, that crap again.


Nobody colonizing Mars. Get real. The most likely outcome, is him landing on a cell when the full Epstein files come out.


The most likely outcome is that no one will be punished for anything in the Epstein files.


It would be but I think that's the platform the author chooses


I know what you mean, it's good to have choices.

But it's always disappointing when people choose things on the internet that end up making it less useful than it was before.

The bigger the negative force, the worse it gets.


You often can't. Also don't assume the original why was correct. Instead learn the problem domain so well that you can make your own judgements.


This also goes the other way too, you don’t assume the original is incorrect.

I see this a lot with developers who come in and start to criticise before understanding.

There is always a reason for why something is as it is, and it’s unlikely that the people before you were just idiots.


I'll convince you one day


It is search if you ask it to produce a list of links.

It does well at filtering information for you.

Going to primary sources is required to verify what it says but it can reduce the leg work rather a lot.


> It is search if you ask it to produce a list of links.

Not in the example I mentioned. It can imagine the links, and the content of the links, and be very confident about it. It literally invented an obituary that didn't exist, gave me a link to a funeral home that 404'd, came up with "in-memoriam" references from regional newsletters that never contained her name. It's actually really scary how specifically fake it was.

I asked it to produce verbatim references from any sources and the links to them, and none of the text it produced could be searched with quotes on any search engine.


Yeah it does punt sometimes but often it works well. Especially on more well written about topics.


I think that's the tricky thing. I'm not saying it's not useful when it is, but you really do need a keen and skeptical eye to be able to know. The problem kind of reminds of bloom filters, such that they're useful for situations when you want to know something might exist or definitely does not exist in a set. Exact truth has some level of permissible error rate, as it does in any situation, but definitely wrong is pretty important to know about.


The issue as I see it is just straight copy/pasting its output. You want to use it as a search tool to give you pointers on things to look up and links to read? Great. Then use that as a basis to read the sources and write your own response. If you aren't familiar enough with the subject area to do that, then you also shouldn't be pasting LLM output on it.


It's not even copy/pasting in some cases. In my example, it confidentially produced "verbatim" references that don't exist anywhere, to specific pages that never mentioned this person's name or contained any of the text. Sometimes completely different people, 404 pages, huge waste of time


Yeah I agree, I've seen the hallucinated references also. Sometimes used by people in internet arguments to make their bullshit seem more legitimate. What I meant though by copy/pasting is people getting the LLM output and then just directly feeding that to the people they're conversing with, instead of looking into what it's saying or really even engaging with it in any way.


Ask it to solve a tough Euler Math puzzle with the search button on and it just copies the answer from the web. Turn search off and it actually computes the answer. Funny how the search button is taken away though.


> It is search if you ask it to produce a list of links.

Unfortunately it can hallucinate those too. I've had ChatGPT cite countless nonexistent academic papers, complete with links that go nowhere.


Which is "fine" so to speak. We do this with using AIs for coding all the time, don't we? As in, we ask it to do things or tell us things about our code base (which we might be new to as well) but essentially use it as a "search engine+" so to speak. Hopefully it's faster and can provide some sort of understanding faster than we could with searching ourselves and building a mental model while doing it.

But we still need to ask it for and then follow file and line number references (aka "links") and verify it's true and it got the references right and build enough of a mental model ourselves. With code (at least for our code base) it usually does get that right (the references) and I can verify. I might be biased because I both know our code base very well already (but not everything in detail) and I'm a very suspicious person, questioning everything. With humans it sometimes "drives them crazy" but the LLM doesn't mind when I call its BS over and over. I'm always "right" :P

The problem is when you just trust anything it says. I think we need to treat it like a super junior that's trained to very convincingly BS you if it's out of its depth. But it's still great to have said junior do your bidding while you do other things and faster than an actual junior and this junior is available 24/7 (barring any outages ;)).


I assume you're on the younger end


No need to assume, I already told everyone my age


The assumption implies the median of the people's age who frequent HN is higher.


People have a right to make their own medical choices. Saying on people with the correct credentials should have input is offensive.


"The fediverse is an island within an increasingly dystopian capitalist hellscape."

This seems like an extreme view to me. It's not so bad


dunno what world you live in, but that was the line that resonated the most for me...


Billions of people are on social media platforms run by massive companies who spend enormous sums of money researching how to get and keep people addicted to their platforms. Vast teams of highly paid experts spend their days figuring out how to keep people coming back, and their happiness or well being are not a concern. Conflict and rage get engagement, so they push conflict and rage.

It's everything previous generations feared about the "boob tube" but a thousand times worse, since it's precisely personalized and backed by analysis and data that TV executives wouldn't have even dreamed of having.

Mastodon is the only social media I pay attention to, because it's the only one that doesn't constantly shovel addictive shit in my face. The fact that approximately nobody uses it, but most of the planet uses the big corporate addiction factories, is in my eyes well worth the quoted statement.


I think it's a great quote. Even bsky is part of the problem until regular people can host nodes in it.

Fedi is never going to be consistent, but it's also always going to be accessible to everyone. And therefore truly by the people for the people.


It also glosses over or ignores the fact that Discord is low key crushing it, and is hardly a "capitalist hellscape"


It's better than the vast majority of social media, but it's still a walled garden. I wouldn't use it for anything important to me.


It's probably old age, but I can't understand how people enjoy Discord or find it useful. To me it's like another Slack to try to stay on top of, except no one is paying me to stay on top of Discord. Discussion forums were truly the peak of the internet to me


i would respond to this but i'm not paying enough Nitro credits to access those characters on my keyboard


When I opened Discord recently a popup appeared explaining how to earn “Orbs” and trade them for rewards. I’d say that’s pretty consistent with “capitalist hellscape”.


I wouldn't say they're at the hellscape stage yet. They need money, but they still haven't locked in enough customers to start outright abusing them. So they use middle of the road approaches like their quests, stores and cosmetics to get some extra cash while also having these things be completely optional and beside the actual messaging experience. Only after they get big enough will the hellscape stage start - perhaps, banner ads, automatically joining sponsored servers for users, clawing back essential features to put them behind Nitro, stuff like that.


those new Discord ads sure are great!


I know this is kinda a grampa thing to say, but can you imagine timemachining a farmer from 100 years ago to today's "capitalist hellscape" and ordering him a burger on Uber Eats...


And he'd ask why the hell you're paying for a taxi for your burger.


I think a rural farmer from 1925 can understand "I pay an immigrant to deliver me hot food via an exploitative middleman", if he's Indian maybe his cousin that went to the city is a dabbawalla.

Like you can do your hypothetical right now with a plane ticket and a 4x4 trip to the Colombian Andes. The peasant might call you a softie, but he's not gonna become Steve Pinker and tell you everything is A-OK.


unfortunately he can only pay you back in 1925 dollars so youll have to take the dime as down payment and get the farmer enrolled in a BNPL


The 01925 dime is worth about US$3 as bullion (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45907742) even without getting into collectors' value, so a couple of dimes or a quarter will pay for a hamburger. You may just have to stop by a jeweler or a pawn shop first.


Yeah, he'd spit it out because it tastes like corn-fed, feed-lot crap.


[flagged]


The catastrophizing perspecting is objetively correct from the perspective of the present and future that we are creating.

The open web as we knew it 20 years ago does not exist. Governments continue to tighten down on freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and financial restrictions through the digitizing of currency and arbitrary sanction mechanisms.

Income inequality continues to increase. Standards of living in the West have marginal increases in material access at the cost of unaffordability in housing and health. Retirement benefits continue to be chipped away. Organized labor is made more and more irrelevant each day.

None of this will make a difference in your daily life. Until it does; then it's too late.


Not really. They probably flagged this as someone modifying the device and thought it could be someone reverse engineering it.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: