41 pointsby Philpaxan hour ago9 comments
  • Jackobrienan hour ago
    The best open models today have been “good enough” to do most knowledge work for a few months. This might be the first US one good enough too. That’s a big deal.

    Open weight US based Opus 5.5 within 12 months.

    • kadoban14 minutes ago
      > Open weight US based Opus 5.5 within 12 months.

      Seems unlikely. Maybe open weight at all near there? That'd be great.

      • p-e-w3 minutes ago
        Why does that seem unlikely? The difference between frontier and open weights has been much less than 12 months for a while now.
  • epsteingpt28 minutes ago
    It's a nice, domestic open weight model.

    Without hundreds of millions in 9 days a small team is producing a model that can beat DeepSeek 4.1 and a platform to tune it.

    Optimistic for the future.

  • a11r40 minutes ago
    Very refreshing to see benchmarks where the reporting team is not the clear winner. They are claiming to be better than GLM 5.3 flash, which is impressive if it holds up outside of benchmarks.
  • tcdentan hour ago
    Is it SOTA yet? No. Are the domestic open weights labs demonstrating incredible velocity? Undeniably.
    • bashtonian hour ago
      Distillation is the tide that lifts all boats
      • epsteingpt25 minutes ago
        Imagine if Mira Murati and John Schulman actually know what they're doing?
        • tcdent4 minutes ago
          Given the time to market and the date in which these labs were founded, I find it far more likely that the lag was representative of them establishing proper internal (RL etc) tooling.
  • singpolyma32 minutes ago
    So basically comparable to DS4.1? But why bother to make something we already have?
  • ddxvan hour ago
    This is amazing! Can't wait to trying this out. Also, crazy that I found this on LinkedIn with more upvotes and discussion than the HN thread has.
  • syntaxing37 minutes ago
    I can’t seem to find the cost? The craziness of deepseek flash 1017 is how ridiculously cheap it is for how capable it is.
    • Bolwin33 minutes ago
      AA lists it as $0.30/0.03/1 and cost per task is $1.18, about double that of deepseek
      • syntaxinga minute ago
        It’s about 2-3X more expensive so about the same token efficiency as 1017. I can see this being a good option for the US.
      • kadoban11 minutes ago
        Wow, that's pretty good.
  • jazzyjackson25 minutes ago
    I don’t like it. Poor form to squat on an old companies name like that, one which has a rich legacy in AI. I know the trademark was cancelled so all I can say is I don’t like it.
  • lostmsu21 minutes ago
    > Small: 594 billion parameters

    cries in GPU racks