villish

Training runs are not deterministic.

I agree which is why I said you could make a similarly capable model.

Open source is about being able to work with the code, not recreate it.

You can also use a hex editor to modify compiled binaries, but no one would consider that "open source".

Random people? No. Governments and big corporations? Yes. It removes any concern of "backdoors", and is currently the best starting point for your own model which will be as capable as k3.

I'm not sure why you're so dismissive about this model. It isn't currently open, but it will be. It was slow when I used it so i'll give you that. There will be other providers with better performance.

My only gripe was that it takes a very long time to think. It's a good model otherwise.

I want to caution against this line of thinking. NSA's fast16 program silently altered data during nuclear simulations, and that is also possible within open weight models. There is no reason to think there is anything like that currently, it also cannot be dismissed. Open source would include the training data so you could create a similarly capable model.

From the blog post moonshot refers to it as open source but only mentions releasing the weights.

What an idiotic, useless bit of pablum to throw in there. Back to 4chan with you.

You want to hate the US but don't want the personal inconvenience of moving away from the daily sites and apps you use. How are these alternatives to american tech going to get enough users if someone like yourself who seems to have a hate boner for the US can't even leave a message board?

https://www.axios.com/2026/07/20/ai-us-china-open-source-kim...

The orange idiot can say whatever he wants. The first amendment makes any ban unconstitutional. US companies being advised about potential backdoors in the models isn't a bad thing, even if I personally think it's FUD, open weights is not open source.

Europe, like much of the West, foolishly delegated tech, media, payment systems, etc, to the United States.

No they didn't. Europe has played a role in building all of these. Especially from the software side.

Also anyone that doesn't like the US is free to stop using any American website, device, or service. There are alternatives to everything. For instance I do not like Meta, I refuse to use any of their websites or devices. The domains are blocked on my LAN.

Anthropic and OpenAI are both very close to getting the US government to ban and fully criminalize the open Chinese models

This is complete nonsense. First of all most Americans don't give a shit about AI companies like it's a sport and those are our teams we have to support. Second the hysteria around AI is mostly from non-Americans that are completely out of the AI race worried about losing access to good models. That is valid, but also it needs to be recognized.

I see what you're saying but I just disagree that those things are more personal. I don't think it would be difficult for any western government to find where you live from your name. Especially when combined with information you share online.

Don't get me wrong I would absolutely prefer a world where everyone is guaranteed privacy and governments would need a courts permission to even look up your phone number. It just will never exist and the only thing truly private is our thoughts.

Are there other countries releasing frontier level models? Mistral is the only relevant player I can think of that comes from Europe, did I miss one?

Previously Anthropic has reported on some Chinese firms doing chicken-shit level of API calls, that at most would be doing some Q and A or final fine tuning

"Anthropic said the campaign was conducted between April 22 and June 5, 2026, and generated more than 28.8 million exchanges with Claude through almost 25,000 fraudulent accounts."

I don't know why you're trying to downplay it.

European models are so far behind because they don't resort to these tactics on a massive scale. Basically every other country is entirely dependent on 2 countries for frontier AI.

Yes I am speculating a leap past LLMs. They are on the edge of what I would actually consider AI.

I believe it is an inevitability and I'm not speculating whether it's in 10 or 50 years.

Well in that case the robot should cook as well! Sure, if the robot could do all the chores in a household that price looks more reasonable.

I quite enjoy doing laundry myself though, it's a routine I do at night and find relaxing.

What is more personal than the contents of your mind? Each interaction and comment is a piece of information which when combined is much more revealing about you than fingerprints.

It's not as personal as your diary, but it is the closest thing to it.

and yet you use american sites and services like this one, where you freely give even more personal data than fingerprints like your interests, thoughts, and more!

I see comments like this all over hackernews but the truth is you actually don't care. You have a choice to not use HN/Reddit/YouTube/whatever but here you are.

You share your thoughts, ideas, likes and dislikes on American sites like this one. Possibly also have a YouTube account you've actively used daily for years. You don't seem to have a problem with that, why? I would argue the totality of your activity on American sites would be much more revealing about you than your fingerprints and home address.

You would honestly pay 50-100k on a robot that just folds laundry or does your dishes? In the US you can get a maid that cleans once a week for $150-250 and would do a much better job. By the time that cost would equal this robot, the robot would be obsolete, not to mention any maintenance costs.

Also dishes are the easiest chore to do around the house, especially if you clean them after use instead of letting them pile up.

You're making an assumption that's debatable, but let's just assume it's correct. The reality is that China won't be the only to achieve such. In the same way that the US put arguably the best minds in the world towards developing the atom bomb, and within a few years the Soviets had theirs as well.

I never said other countries won't gain access to the technology. The point is that the 1st country to achieve that leap will get to use it to gain advantages in literally every sector.

I get some people are hoping that AI research is for the benefit of all, and I do too, but that is wishful thinking.

Most people aren't entirely convinced that AI will ever be "too valuable" in the first place.

There will be a generational leap that makes current LLMs obsolete in every way. Let's say China gets there first, why would the CCP let it be released publicly? That is an insanely valuable advantage in everything from war fighting to economics and more.

Humans for millennia have used technological advances to make better weapons. AI will be no different, unfortunately. Wars will be fought with drones and artificial intelligence from now on.

Legally gray practices? Such as what?

Old politicians who barely understand how to use e-mail had a panic attack due to Anthropics marketing about Mythos and being told that Chinese models were "attacking" (distillation) US frontier labs to train theirs.

They pull the only lever they could in an attempt to stop it, but again, they don't understand how any of it works. The export ban lasted a few weeks yet everyone keeps crying about it like the US is shady.

In reality the entire world is 100% dependent on the output of US and China for frontier AI. Anyone outside of those two countries will be loud about either closing off access. I personally think it is inevitable that China and the US stops producing frontier level open models when they become too valuable.

The best feature is being able to use Firefox extensions and thus uBlock Origin and sponsorblock on iOS. It's a little buggy but worth it for me.

If someone proves it's fake worst they get is a month of bad PR and then people will move on.

You can say they stole from everyone to train their models in the first place and that's valid, but this isn't that. You are saying they are actively ex-filtrating data from any company using their services and lying about it.

Google/Apple/Microsoft or all of the dozen trillion dollar companies in the US would absolutely crush them in litigation. Neither OpenAI or Anthropic would be able to survive it. It's just not worth the risk.

Do you have proof of that?

Do models know when they're being benchmarked? I also used K3 briefly and noticed it spent a very long time thinking and obviously a lot of tokens.

However I've seen some benchmarks say it uses fewer than fable which hasn't been my experience.

The only distinction I made was between established and new. It truly doesn't matter at all if I use both law and regulation even in the same sentence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_(European_Union)

"A regulation is a legal act of the European Union which becomes immediately enforceable as law in all member states simultaneously."

I think it's fine that I used the terms interchangeably but you can disagree if you want. Pick the term you prefer instead.

Also, I didn't say "I don't like the EU's laws/regulations". I'm stating that they do target US tech with NEW laws/regulations and the result is large fines. A lot of the time they are wrapped up in a PR package about competition and after years of this, Europeans still prefer to use US tech.

The EU creates new laws in order to constrain the business models of big tech, gives them a deadline to comply, and then fines them if they determine the changes weren't sufficient.

You can argue that regulation is fine and I agree, but those fines generate a lot of money. The commission then uses those funds for various programs.

If tech companies blatantly break established law then of course they should be punished. However that's not what is happening most of the time, it's new regulations to constrain US tech.

We're talking about a dozen companies with trillion dollar market caps in the US that would each point their army of lawyers at OpenAI/Anthropic. Neither would survive that litigation. That risk far outweighs any potential gains in training data. Just not worth it.

The US is a massive economy that businesses want access to. If it wasn't extremely profitable they would exit, but they don't. That should tell you all you need to know about any "risk".

It would be a tiny version of K3 not nearly as good. You need terabytes of memory to run the full model.

Not for Enterprise. You can safely assume the trillion dollar companies would ban GPT/Claude from being used in house if that was a concern.