What is this bug you described? First time hearing about it... Mistral seems weirdly low, it's a very big model, maybe they didn't finetune it for benchmarks?
On the bar chart I included what I think are the most popular models right now (not objectively, based on my anecdotal observations, link to include/exclude what you want).
What do you think? Is it fair? There was, and to some digree still is, a bit of controversy about AA score indexes after they updated their benchmarks to V5.0. I am mainly interested in your thoughts about QFN in relation to other models.
This is huge news for (moving in the direction of) universal Strata-like engine in native llama.cpp - if i uderstand it correctly. Good job, for everybody and especially for people with low VRAM. VERY GOOD NEWS!!!
I'm thinking right now - maybe it is not a coincidence that: (1) just as popular blogposts started to suggest that we should investigate open weights models; (2) the Cloud BigBoys started to advertise they can perform "brain surgery" on smaller models (manually adjust weights). Maybe it's just marketing, nevertheless investigation of open weights models can only benefit people insterested in the idea, hope it will not scare the general public too much though.
It sounds like fearmongering (so hot right now), but hey: that is the true benefit of opensource! - it can be diagnosed and monitored. Claude just refuses to answer biology homework question, because of "security" (fuck Anthropic for that). Overall I agree that vigilance is needed, but still it should not make people dismiss open weight/open source models - if anything it should convice people to invest (their time and money) into open weight models EVEN MORE as they can be further finetuned / distilled / pruned or otherwise modified and run locally with any prompt you would like with any behaviour you train it to perform (i.e. you CAN make your own model out of it, even if it is anti-"insert your identity here").
The final points of this article are worth implementing regardless of your stance, i'll cite them here:
Let the people play what they want, even if it is slop! And the stealing/inspiring part - i get it, it is frustrating and not fair, but not the AI is the problem here, it's just a tool - the problem is with the copycat's reasoning (that is to make a quick buck and don't give a damn about broader consequences for the future). If the game is a shameless copy it already is prone to be copyright claimable (although i don't believe in legal batles, especially for small developers or not wealthy individuals that clearly are disadvantaged from the start), if it is not - let the Poeple decide. Of course it poses a threat of oversaturating the market - i don't care, it's not new - Steam has been oversaturated with non-AI-porn-game-slop for years now and nothing bad happened.
Qwen3.5-4B-3D-Coder (finetune) with video example seems kinda useful, and quite impressive for its size! I haven't tested it personally though.
Interesting, maybe caused by design focused on overprotection against distillation of the thinking process, so "it's a feature, not a bug" mentality. I don't use gemini models so I can't confirm by myself, thanks for pointing that out!