Speculation: open models is what will kill Anthropic and OpenAI. Hyperscalers can run the models without a licensing fee. Apple can make them smaller and put them on the device.

The frontier models are an edge and a liability. They're astronomically expensive to train. Without them, their models will fade into obscurity. Their marketing depends on people believing the models are meaningfully different, as people have sweatily argued on this forum. Personally, I'm not convinced there's much of a difference between these models at this point. The harness is what takes these random and hallucinogenic models and make them into something deterministic and useful.

https://stateofopensource.ai/state-of-open-source-ai-2026.pd...

the pdf is easier to read

The design and layout made it harder to read than it needed to be.

Regardless, the inference costs dropping almost 50× is really amazing to see. And now Kimi K3 release has shown how open models are getting closer to the frontier level already. Open source AI is moving a lot faster than Anthropic and OpenAI would have expected lol.

This is really insane to me.

There's nothing practical about open-source models yet that makes them even remotely comparable to closed frontier models.

All the hype around GLM, Qwen, now Kimi.... Are people really this naive that they believe these reports or, more worringly, are people NOT using these models and seeing the HUGE gap that still exists?

Take a task, any medium-sized task, decently scoped that you'd trust to give to Sonnet to finish without a hitch. Now give it to ANY open-source frontier model and watch them struggle and go in circles while failing tool calls and randomly assuming things.

Open-source is and has been amazing but its so hard to deploy reliably and at scale and there's still big problems in the underlying models with instruction following and tool calling that makes it basically unusable for production workloads at a decent price point...

"Open won"... to be fair cause "google paid it".

The UI is really hard on the eyes. Personally, I think the font size is way too big, and the animation timing feels off. If this is a benchmark page and not a product page, I feel like the information should be scannable at a glance. The UX is bad.

Quick fix for the font, which many people are (rightly) complaining about.

  Array.from(document.getElementsByClassName("quote")).forEach(p => { p.style.marginTop = "20px"; p.classList.remove("quote", "reveal") })

It appears open models were used to create this slop.

That opening is so hard to understand what they are trying to say, from the font and how it's written. It took me several times rereading to even grasp.

Plus the article is filled with cryptic things like:

    Open ships easy.
    Open deploys hard.

Maybe its the wildfire smoke in my eyes, but that font choice feels aggressive.

This new trend of content appearing while scrolling down is so terrible accessibility-wise, I do not understand how Mozilla of all institutions would do it.

Not every trend needs to be followed. Have some backbone. You receive donations to have that.

___

Apart from the website being - frankly - bullshit, the content is also - frankly - bullshit.

It's just on the frontpage because the title says "open source AI".

Just like how the web was won?

I think Mozilla is chasing a past formula, but the projection isn't linear enough to remain consistent, and the critical parts of the outcome, utter centralization of the market dominance of the three C's, are left out of the equation.

We might get the consolation prize, a few nerds having competitive alternatives to applaud, but we will be left with the hidden costs: stagnation by bloated market leaders, consumers and businesses pouring trillions of dollars into the commercial offerings while open development wonders where money comes from, and the leakage of these imbalances into political and social spheres.

If we follow a Mozilla template and get to the peak of Mozilla's success at the web, look at what that really is. Facebook, Amazon, Google etc are orthogonal to that equation.