‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

MiMo v2.6

1130 points · 483 comments · volf_

  1. rao-v · · focus · HN ↗
    I know we have strong views on what a truly open model is (open weights, open training data, open training code etc.) but I really like how transparent they’ve been about the training of this model.

    The realtime dashboard they shared during training (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mimo.xiaomi.com&#x2F;rl&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;mimo.xiaomi.com&#x2F;rl&#x2F;) was an incredible learning and teaching tool for me, and they’ve been unusually comprehensive in sharing details about their methodology (check out that tech report - it&#x27;s got lots of clever behind the scene tricks like Google or Deepseek writeups) and benchmark scores (even the stuff they didn’t do well on).

    If you’re releasing an open model going forward, please consider offering the community more of this transparency!

    1. MangoCoffee · · focus · HN ↗
      maybe this is why Dario want to slow down AI development and all the big AI labs in the USA is singing the same song.

      whey they all singing the same tune. it make me question what is their real motives.

      they are afraid of Chinese good enough LLM model killing their margin. we already have story about US companies switch some task to use cheaper Chinese model hosted on Neoclouds.

      1. jwolfe · · focus · HN ↗
        Please explain how putting an upper bound on how good the strongest models can be prevents cheaper less strong models from catching up, rather than enabling it. I do not understand this argument at all.
        1. rbjorklin · · focus · HN ↗
          The general idea is that Anthropic&#x2F;OpenAI is pushing this narrative as an attempt at &quot;Regulatory Capture&quot;[1] which would allow them to make it prohibitively expensive for anyone but them to enter the market thus stifling competition.

          * 1: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Regulatory_capture" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Regulatory_capture

          1. chanakya · · focus · HN ↗
            How would that slow down the Chinese models, given that the US has no regulatory reach in China?
            1. girvo · · focus · HN ↗
              You target the US companies: if they can&#x27;t use these Chinese models, then they&#x27;re less of a danger for a now captive audience in the US (and the West generally).

              This is already kind of the case: the big enterprises don&#x27;t really want to touch the latest Chinese models. It&#x27;s a real pain, personally, I want to use them at work!

              1. pimeys · · focus · HN ↗
                Show them you can burn tokens in seven sessions day and night with comparable results to Opus with less energy and less than 10 dollars a day, per dev.
                1. girvo · · focus · HN ↗
                  We have. Unfortunately there are political realities that get in the way, and Bedrock for example doesn&#x27;t have GLM 5.3 (Flash or otherwise) or anything new&#x2F;useful

                  I do imagine it&#x27;ll change, but it hasn&#x27;t yet.

                2. unethical_ban · · focus · HN ↗
                  If it&#x27;s hosted, all they know is &quot;data goes to China&quot;.

                  Until profitable, reputable third parties host open models in the US with ZDR or they become plug-and-play for self-hosting at a modest cost, paying the US models is as much about data protection and liability as performance.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.