Interesting. Do they have Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Although "westernised" is a bad word to use. There is nothing "Western" about this. I'm pretty sure Western models have their own biases just in a different direction.

We already have right names for it. It's called uncensored.

Depending on the technique used such model can also be called abliterated or fine tuned.

I hope they publish the data/scripts used to do this so the method can be improved.

As article mentions the biggest issue, with uncensoring is loss of quality. Some loss is impossible to be avoided, but it can be minimised.

▲

riskable 5 hours ago | parent [-]

> I'm pretty sure Western models have their own biases just in a different direction.

This statement warrants testing.

If we don't see an equivalent study out in a few days saying that this is true, it's clearly false. The methodology of the study was clear and easy to replicate (in short order, though you'll need the hardware/money for tokens). No reason why other groups shouldn't be performing the same exact tests with Western models (open weights or not).

▲

skinfaxi 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Are you going to perform the work? If not, why do you expect someone else will?

▲

tiahura 5 hours ago | parent [-]

Because these are ads. He may not have a company marketing products in this space, but others do.

	▲	riskable 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Exactly. I don't have the power to replicate the testing but this is the type of thing that easily makes the news! If you have the power to do so, why wouldn't you perform your own testing right now and release the results? It's a marketing/status gold mine. If you find that western models don't have the described anti-china bias, then maybe you won't publish anything since it's not as interesting—that would be evidence there's no conspiracy. Hence my conclusion that if we don't hear anything soon, the anti-china accusation is false.

▲

NewJazz 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

If we don't see an equivalent study out in a few days saying that this is true, it's clearly false.

Yeah, that's not how evidence works, bud.