Top
Best
New

Posted by sbochins 10 hours ago

The Kimi K3 Moment(stephen.bochinski.dev)
238 points | 259 commentspage 2
Pesto 8 hours ago|
I think the biggest problem with Chinese models is that they seems to overthink for most of the tasks, especially for smaller ones. The OpenAI models have in my experience only gotten better in terms of efficiency.
fastball 8 hours ago|
Yes, this (imo) is a clear result of benchmaxxing. You can get a much better score on most "intelligence" benchmarks by massively over-saturating reasoning. This looks good on those, but for actual daily usage makes the models much less effective: I don't want a model I use for coding to burn a bunch of reasoning (read: time) on trivial tasks.
bensyverson 7 hours ago|||
It's undeniable that some of these models generate a ton of thinking tokens, but it's arguable whether that makes them "much less effective."

For example, Kimi 2.7 has been really effective for me despite having verbose thinking blocks, simply because it runs so fast. Speed-wise, it feels about like Sonnet, possibly faster.

gpm 8 hours ago|||
I strongly suspect the flip side is that in the future it enables you to train smarter models by "distilling" the end result of the super duper heavily thinking models.
esafak 7 hours ago||
But these models already distill the smarter American ones ;)
lkasjdhf 4 hours ago||
It's turtles all the way down
hosel 7 hours ago||
Kimi K3 is really good, but it’s obviously worse than Fable, usually worse than Opus, in my experience.
neosat 4 hours ago||
Definitely not my experience. Fable is better but I'd prefer K3 to Opus based my experience with both.
sbochins 6 hours ago||
That’s not obvious to me at all. Especially your claim around opus.
igravious 5 hours ago||
Agreed. I think benchmarks are pretty much right in pegging it somewhere in between Opus and Fable.
kvasilev 7 hours ago||
Claude is not reliable anymore with their sudden Fable access drops etc tbh and I am happy there are good alternatives coming out
petilon 8 hours ago||
The current administration's immigration policy isn't helping. This wouldn't have happened 10 years ago because the US was this city on the hill that everyone wanted to immigrate to. Talented Asian researchers would have immigrated to the US and China would be deprived of talent.
lossolo 5 hours ago||
Your comment feels like an outdated brain drain model where talented Chinese researchers naturally want to leave China and the only question is whether the US lets them in.

That may have been closer to reality 10-20 years ago, China is a different country now, what I mean by that is they offer research funding, they have huge digital behemoths (alibaba, tencent, huawei, bytedance etc), large scale deployment opportunities and prestigious careers. Many graduates return because the opportunity set is attractive and they want to return, it's not just because US immigration policy pushed them out. Some also want to contribute to their own country's technological progress (which is a normal motivation btw), like probably you are also a patriot and want your country to succeed.

So, really, China's AI progress is not mainly the result of America failing to absorb every talented Chinese researcher. China has built a domestic ecosystem capable of producing and keeping top talent itself. I feel like a lot of Americans do not understand this.

petilon 5 hours ago||
Chinese students still want to attend US universities [1]. While it is true that the progress made by China is a factor, this administration's policies are the bigger deterrent [2] [3].

[1] https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2025-02-21/why-ch...

[2] https://www.wsj.com/world/china/americas-allure-fades-in-chi...

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/06/chinese-studen...

lossolo 4 hours ago||
It doesn't really address the point. Chinese students wanting to attend US universities is evidence that US universities remain attractive, not that those students would otherwise permanently immigrate to the US or that China lacks attractive careers for them afterward.

US immigration policy may be unnecessarily pushing away talent but the assumption that talented Chinese researchers would naturally remain in America unless prevented from doing so ignores the growth of Chinese universities/labs, companies, their funding, national prestige etc.

I mean, don't get me wrong, US is still highly attractive, it is just no longer the only place where an ambitious Chinese researcher can do important work and grow.

onlyrealcuzzo 6 hours ago|||
China never allow US AI in China, so they HAVE to build Chinese equivalents...

US immigration policy isn't a big factor.

China's got 1.8B people. If you don't think they've got the talent to pull this off, even if a lot of it leaves to live elsewhere, you're naive.

No one uses Baidu, but they built their own Google, and it's good.

They built their own Facebooks and Instagrams.

The US isn't the only place in the world where people can build software...

petilon 6 hours ago||
"China can draw on a talent pool of 1.3 billion people, but the United States can draw on a talent pool of 7 billion and recombine them in a diverse culture that enhances creativity in a way that ethnic Han nationalism cannot." --Lee Kuan Yew, former prime minister of Singapore.
cuuupid 8 hours ago|||
The visa that would correlate to this is the O-1 visa

20k O-1 visas were issued last FY which was mostly under the Trump admin, up from 19.5k the previous FY under the Biden admin

petilon 8 hours ago|||
No it is H-1B visa. Right out of the university it is hard to recognize extraordinary talent. People like Sundar Pichai were not recognized as extraordinary right out of the university, he had to start at the bottom and rise up the ranks.
cuuupid 6 hours ago|||
This makes even less sense, Trump admin has been here for 1 year, the implication here is a university grad on H1-B in January would become a world class researcher capable of building a frontier model in <18mo
johnbarron 7 hours ago|||
Melania got a EB-1 "extraordinary ability" immigrant visa
InsideOutSanta 7 hours ago||
To be fair, that was clearly well deserved. Marrying Trump and then becoming first lady is definitely an extraordinary ability; I doubt I could have done it.
arjie 7 hours ago||||
This is why VC is actually hard. Everyone’s instinct is always “Man, once the company has demonstrated it’s awesome I would love to have been in the seed round”. The tendency to want “proven performers” is the default belief.

When people demonstrate their capability thoroughly, the Chinese government takes away their passports. You’re not exactly going to get them here with an O-1.

cuuupid 6 hours ago||
This admin and its policies on immigrant visas have been around for 1 year and Biden was famously pro immigration
dbbk 7 hours ago|||
The O-1 has also been abused for a long time, basically any software engineer kid who gets into Y Combinator has been getting an O-1
cuuupid 6 hours ago|||
This is essentially the point of the visa, it feels wrong especially as YC drops standards and increases cohort sizes, but the same power laws that keep them winning also apply here in maximizing economic value of each O-1 approval

Basically of all visas O-1 is virtually guaranteed to have highly positive economic value

33MHz-i486 8 hours ago||
- thats not a sustainable strategy

- china’s homegrown tech industries already achieved escape velocity from it a long time ago, after China fenced off its market for Alibaba and Baidu in the ‘00s. some of their AI innovation at the edges was already top class 10 years ago

petilon 8 hours ago||
It has been a sustainable strategy for the tech industry for decades.
aswegs8 7 hours ago||
We're having so many moments! Every day a new moment.
mattmcal 7 hours ago||
I can see the economics of open vs. frontier models turning out similarly to pharmaceuticals, where generic drugs cost a fraction what the name brands do and Americans end up paying the highest prices in the world partly as a consequence of propping up drug discovery research.
fathermarz 7 hours ago||
Terms of use are very broad and not friendly for most things.

Can’t use for commercial purposes. Can’t opt out of training. Data retained.

oofbey 7 hours ago|
Correct: can't opt out of training. This is well documented.

"Can't use for commercial purposes" - incorrect AFAICT. In what sense do you mean this? The open weight MIT version obviously allows for commercial use, but I don't think that's what you're referring to, because training data is irrelevant on the open weight version. Pretty sure the API allows commercial use too. Maybe the free version doesn't? But who cares?

fathermarz 2 hours ago||
> Service Misuse. You acknowledge that without the written consent of us and/or the relevant rights holders, (i)you have no authority to use Kimi and the content generated by Kimi in any commercial manner; (ii)you may not use our Services to develop products or services that compete with us.

https://www.kimi.com/user/agreement/modelUse

mochidusk 7 hours ago||
GPT 5.6 Sol comes out ahead of Kimi K3 on price/task (but not significantly so). You're probably thinking, "Why use Kimi K3? Isn't an open model supposed to beat the closed one on price?", but you need to consider that the closed models are completely hobbled when trying to do anything security-related. For my use-case, I can't risk getting pwned because I'm using a model that refuses to secure my app while there is now an open model that obliges to obliterate any app that isn't protected.
ashu1461 6 hours ago||
A lot of these open source models do look good on public benchmark but not sure if they are that trustworthy with production workloads.

Is anyone using open source models for anything major ?

galaxyLogic 6 hours ago|
If Kim was "distilled" from Claude, how much were the token costs, assuming Kim got everything it can out of Claude?
More comments...