my prediction is even if open source Chinese models are 90% as good (or even a bit better, which I don’t really believe because of benchmark hacking) enterprises will still pay for Claude / ChatGPT and the harness, integrations, and peace of mind versus using some Chinese cloud.

▲

sschueller 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Enterprise's peace of mind is being able to use the model and not have the US government decide on a whim to block access.

Additionally I may want to run attack simulations which requires the removal of safeguards. My only option is to use an open model I can run on my own hardware.

▲

eightysixfour 3 hours ago | parent [-]

You think the US can’t, on a whim, decide US companies can’t use Chinese models? They already showed exactly how they would do it - designate it a supply chain risk and say anyone using it can’t be a provider to the government.

▲

nicoburns 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

For non-US companies, the supply chain risk is probably higher with US models. The US government has already removed access to some models (Fable). IIRC that particular incident also affected US companies.

▲

sschueller 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

How exactly is that going to be enforced? Anyway I am not actually talking about US based companies.

	▲	hyperpape 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		> How exactly is that going to be enforced? Flow chart: 1. Is your company run by fuckwits? If no: they will not try to trick the US government about whether they are using prohibited models when the government asks. Your CISO will block access. We're done. If yes, continue to #2. 2. Are they the specific brand of fuckwits who would try to trick the US government about whether they are using prohibited models? If no: They will probably still not let you use those models, but maybe they'll be bad at enforcement. If yes: this is probably not the kind of company that it will serve your long term interests to work for, but have fun with the prohibited models.
	▲	eightysixfour 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> How exactly is that going to be enforced? How is anything enforced on B2G agreements? Contractually & legally, which turns into internal policy, which shuffles the risk on to the rogue dev deciding to use GLM instead of the mandated Grok subscription. This is literally the playbook they ran for Claude. I know folks who work for government contractors who were immediately going through the evals to get rid of Anthropic because it became a risk for them.

▲

microtonal 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

peace of mind versus using some Chinese cloud

These are open weight models (GLM-5.3 soon too). You can run them on the Together AIs or Firework AIs of this world. Use OpenRouter or HF Inference Providers in between and you can effortlessly switch between models and providers.

I have been using GLM and Kimi models the last few months mixed with the latest Anthropic models and for my daily work there is barely a difference anymore (except for pricing).

▲

KronisLV 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

On a tech level I’d say that Kimi and GLM 5.3 on Max reasoning are good enough for non-trivial planning and exploration and on High are good enough for various implementation tasks. They can easily replace Opus 5 for me and mostly even Fable (webdev with some ML and DevOps work on the side, as well as local software).

All of that pretty much means nothing for the orgs that just want to do the AI equivalent of picking IBM.

▲

epolanski 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

In the real enterprise world companies are running their processes writing Gemini "gems" or using copilot because they were already google/Microsoft customers.

Am I the only one that knows people in industries like insurance, banking, consultancy, materials, etc? Cause none of them gives two damns about what the leading SOTA is, procurement and compliance matter.