nsoonhui

I believe so, this checks out with my experience, especially when comparing between the US models and Chinese models which benchmark scores are neck to neck with US ones.

My experience with Chinese open models is that they couldn't cope at all with my production work; both GLM 5.3 and Deepseek v4 ( or was it 4.1? Couldn't remember too well) went into infinite loop and wasted my tokens until my OpenRouter wallet reached 0; good thing I didn't enable the auto topup. US models, by contrast, breezed past them.

Even for simpler tasks, Chinese models took long time to complete, and I needed to supervise closely. The price for Chinese models, in the end, didn't come cheap, mainly because too much time was wasted on thinking, and this was regardless of whether they finished the tasks or not.

I am not too uncomfortable with the blatant Chinese model shills here ( I got comment history to prove this), but honestly why is it a problem for kimi or any other Chinese models to have influencers on their list or even payroll?

To me, as long as those influencers are giving truthful and useful information, why should we care whether they are coordinating with the model providers or even getting paid by them?

I'm absolutely bewildered that this is the top comment. 'Pacing the frontier,' if eventually enforced, will only affect US companies, not Chinese companies. How do you even 'pace the frontier' for Chinese models, and why should they agree to it?

China doesn't have a good track record of following signed agreements ( the WTO thing comes to mind), and this whole 'pacing the frontier' concept is even less enforceable than a signed agreement. So I would say that Anthropic/OpenAI called for this not because they thought it would eliminate the threat of Chinese models, but in spite of the risk of being overtaken.