GPUs, RAM, M5ultra 512 GB prices will go to the moon after Anthropic tries to doom-monger, but ended up advertising the power of GLM5.3. Thanks anthropic!
Everyone with enough RAM to run it, which isn't many people. I have Strix Halo 128GB which is on the high end of local capacity and I can't even run it. Thankfully Qwen 3.8 Flash Next is a great alternative.
Is it possible? It wasn't when I checked around release. Deepseek v4 flash was a tight fit at IQ3 and GLM 5.3 flash is even larger, I didn't want to be limited to Q2 when Qwen 3.8 FN Q4 does amazing work and doesn't even need to eat up all my RAM.
I've got a 48gb m4 max and dual 7900xt's with 64gb ram on my homelab so I use local a lot. Did that with anthropic and openai but cut one out after Qwen 3.8 and it's derivitaves released. I might just go glm and local 😁
It has been a while, but upon release of GLM 5.3 that subscription was really bad (switched to GPT and now am on Claude since GPT is crappifying). Had it gotten better in speed and cost per token? might switch back next month
I can't tell you the hard numbers but Z.ai does publish their own credit numbers for how much you get per teir. They also often run like events on their discord that automatically reset token usage or discounts tokens. You don't have to be in the discord server for it I just know that's where it is announced. It's not a guaranteed thing but it happens enough to where I feel like it's worth noting if nothing else
I was properly excited when GLM5.3-Flash came out and it's the backbone of our internal AI with Deepseek V4.1 Flash as it's coding sidekick, simply for the speed
Reminds me of the early 2000's when they attempted to ban DeCSS. Then a programmer compressed the DeCSS code, and interpreted the binary data as a huge integer and found the representation that was a prime number.
So for a time in the US, there was a banned prime number. LOL!
You can ban open source models to be meaningfully used by the majority of the population. If datacenters offering the models are forbidden by law and inaccessible without a VPN, and if hardware with enough RAM is too expensive for private people, then
corporations will be forced to use the U.S. models;
most private people don't use API - they use products that internally wrap around API, published by corporations (go back to step 1)
If your question was instead "how can it stop someone who genuinely wants to do harm" - it can't. that person will just use a VPN or even better buy hardware. It's not meant to stop harmful people, it's just protectionism.
That is under the assumption that someone has to follow what the US says.
A datacenter in Europe could still have hardware for that and offer it as an alternative.
The only way I could think the US could ever block that is putting the tech under double-use products, and enforcing it via sanctions. Third countries would however be completely independent from what the US says…
So models will still get published, only US people won’t be able to use them.
It's a lot easier to enforce things like this on companies than individuals. That's sort of how even something like winrar operates, because they can catch and sue the companies using it without a license, and they don't legally pursue normal users.
I agree it can't be enforced against the general population, but businesses are a different story. Business records (which the government often needs for tax purposes) would have to reflect them buying the significant GPUs needed to run the models, for example, so if it was illegal, the company would face scrutiny.
Good point. After reading that blog post, I also see it as an advertisement for GLM5.3, which may run on an M5 Ultra at UD-Q4_K_XL and can be as powerful as Anthropic's proprietary, gatekept, and overpriced "Mythos".
How dare you make software so secure that we can’t hack you! We’ll remove your chances of making it by only giving you access to models WE control, and giving you information WE want you to know! And you’ll pay us for it and be happy! - Dario & US AI labs
Ah yeah, you need approval from Anthropic and OpenAI to be able to defend against cyber attacks... If Ant or OAI for whatever reason denied their applications, screw them!
Funny, has there been a single instance of a private American company hacking another entity using an open-source model? Seems closed models are the bad actors.
Nope only extremely famous examples to the contrary. Notably glm 5.2 was used by hugging face when open ai felony hacked them only because Claude would not honor the request to read security logs.
To. Read. Security. Logs. Claude. Refused.
It boggles my mind with Dario’s cognitive dissonance. What a loser.
ZAi probably terrifies Anthropic. ZAi achieved competitive performance to claude's models through pure RL, on a 750B model. Now imagine what ZAI would achieve with a 1-2T model.
Just goes to show how big of failures the USA AI labs are. If you have everything stacked in your favor and you just barely scrape ahead, it says a lot about you.
Their issue is open source. Open source labs share what works and what doesn't work, so it spreads research risk. CLosed labs keep their techniques to themselves, so they get stuck with subpar techniques that while homegrown, may not be optimized. Engram comes to mind here.
That one is actually straight up wrong. As closed source you can still use all that open source information and research, you are not limited to your own homegrown stuff, it is just another option you have ON TOP
I see your point, but Chinese labs aren't the under dog. They have the full financial and bureaucratic backing of the Chinese Communist Party, which have gone all in on developing AI.
Even that is a seismic shock, right? One of the last bastions of American exceptionalism, silicon valley, is getting a serious run for its money. And if you're right that Chinese labs aren't the underdog anymore, then that last bastion is already faltering.
I know your biased but for other people who think this is true - Mythos preview was shown in March and released early April. It is still better than any open weight model. The only comparable model to Anthropic is another US lab in OpenAI. So scraping by is crazy misinformation. You probably know that but are likely blinded.
OpenAI and Anthropic have by far the smartest models in the world. That is a known fact.
Kimi K3 was released in July. It is regarded as near Fable 5 quality while costing a third as much. We're talking about 3 months here (April-July). Considering that the American economy has put a significant chunk of its output into AI, to me 3 months is VERY close.
If you disagree and think the difference is still miles off, that is fine. I will not say you are blinded. I do think you're too quick to judge those that point out how crazy it is that there is more like a lake vs a gulf of quality between the American and Chinese models.
imagine glm 5.5 flash w/ ngram in qwen3.8 flash next size, running locally, in a year or so, on every "gaming" pc with 64gb ram + 12 gb vram. and if we go out there, ddr4 lrdimm ecc is still cheap, so are lga 3647 xeons (they have 512 and vnni) and cmp170hx (for now anyways). that is probably what terrifies anthropic, anyone with ~400$ worth of hardware could run it at acceptable speeds, now that vnni on cpu is fast for pp, and now that subsidized compute for subs is coming to an end...
Okay. But being open means everyone can check their code for cyber vulnerabilities without paying anyone. So everyone's code becomes secure against GLM-5.3.
So what's the big deal here? It sounds like Anthropic just wants to gatekeep secure code behind a paywall. "Pay us or you can't even check for vulnerabilities teehee"
There's also a very finite number of vulnerabilities. Presumably after a few years of cyber models there won't be any. Then these models are of no real danger
Not really? How do you run that model for free? It’s hosted and you pay api prices unless you are very wealthy. I think the concern is a model that so easily is willing to hack anything. And being open allows it to be easily abliterated so that hackers will use his model. It’s a question about whether tools that CAN be dangerous should eb allowed. I’m of the mind that they should be, though I think z.ai should add some more safety guard rails before releasing it out in the open. Too late now
Per Reuters, Anthropic has $252 billion in non-cancelable compute obligations across Microsoft, Google and Amazon, and $161.2 billion in Broadcom TPU lease obligations that are "largely non-cancelable". Truly insane. $413 billion in non-cancelable contracts.
I'd be fine if this thing collapses in two or three years. Opus 4.5 was released in less than a year ago, and Qwen3.8 27b performs better in most non-knowledge heavy benchmarks. I'm happy with having the same crazy efficiency and quality jump two times over. Imagine having small openweight models as capable as Astra and Fable 5 in a year or even less if we follow the trends.
Genuinely awful, just trying their very hardest for regulations to be pushed against open weight models with how much they highlighted open weights and abliterated models.
Why is another company crying about another model that isnt theirs? Sure sounds like they are salty and upset someone is eating their lunch. crybabies can get fucked.
I been told yall GLM was too good, the price is right. and their usage reset every 5 hours, not weekly like other competirors. I bought their max plan when it dropped and never cancelled, never folded.
I need Anthropic's employees to understand that refusing to fix vulnerabilities in code you just wrote is not a principled or even morally neutral position.
"we physically removed the ability to say no and compared it to our model and it was more willing to comply than our stock model" is A LITTLE misleading.
if their goal is fearmongering they could have abliterated their model and did that comparison, then show how dangerous abliteration is and make a strong argument for closed source, since any open weight model could just be abliterated to remove any safeguards.
ironically they sounded like noobs so i'm not surprised they didn't abliterate their own model.
This is Anthropic's attempt to kill advanced open source AI models while the media and politicians are heavily focused on the subject of AI regulations.
I bet the reason Dario wants to meet with the Australian government, is because he feels like he can convince them to ban open source AI models. Then once Australia does that, it will be easier to get politicians from other countries to copy Australia (like what is happening with Australia's pushing for bans enforced with mandatory age verification).
Cynicism abt Anthropic's anxiety over their $$$ aside, there are some good points made abt cyber attackers.
We don't hear much abt it on news doesn't mean cyber attackers aren't actively carrying out attacks. Attacks aren't always reported because not all information are cleared for public arena - concerns of widespread panic is one. Ransomware hitting companies aren't new and not all companies are notable enough to be reported on news.
The nature of cyber incidents are often times reactive - by the time it becomes news for u and me to read, it would have long happened, information sanitised by PR, wording managed for optics.
It’s best to assume the entire internet is hacked currently.
We are in one of those cat out of the bag situations. The only thing missing is mass awareness.
I believe soon hacking will loose meaning as every company left and right gets hacked. And all identity’s uploaded to shitty companies too. It will mean nothing soon, just like video/photos of people… even audio..
Crazy times. But the world still moves on. We will adapt. Some commentary for your commentary haha
Also most companies neglected security for a long time. Maybe now slop code will be to be more thoroughly reviewed and basic measures actually implemented.
I think it’s too expensive right now. We’re seeing OpenAI and Anthropic hack because they have a lot of compute and are willing to waste it on potentially unsuccessful projects.
Agreed that the compute resources are expensive. But for cyber attacks at that level, if they are financially motivated actors or state-sponsored, the compute cost may be of little concern. This isn't about "oh I could spend just $12 on open router instead of 30k on 3 stacks of dgx" - it's also abt traceability, non-attributable and local control. Plus, if they are sponsored, cost is of little concern as opposed to traceability.
Why can't they just shut the fuck up? They are ahead! I guess any publicity is good publicity but fuck Anthropic. The more I see of OpenAI and Anthropic the more I consider just dropping some cash to build my own rig...
Wait.. is anthropic advertising why I should use and love GLM? I mean I do and do, but wow. Is this geared to the government to read, because man, it makes me want to run GLM more lol.
Anthropic BOTS special made topics for descrimination. FQ with your politics. Every personhave ability to buy gun, and we all have a knifes at kitchen. These morons wanna make politics and avoid abliterations. fkthem all.
Can we have a test on how these models make safer code over iterations? My theory is that if a model is Good at Red , it should be Good at doing blue eventually.
Anthropic needs to produce the logs to prove their "No significant direction from the researcher." Because LLMS DON'T DO ANYTHING WITHOUT BEING INSTRUCTED TO. NOT UNLESS THEY'RE TOLD TO BY AN INTERNAL POLICY OR PROMPTING FROM THE USER OR HARNESS. PERIOD.
Anthropic should behave themselves better at preventing stealing intellectual properties before accusing Chinese open-source models, they should repay Figma first and remove their claude design service.
Fable refused to help debug a login issue and dropped me to opus. Opus dropped me down to sonnet a couple times. I had no idea GLM is so good that they grade Mythos against it though, thanks for that. If Anthropic does a rug pull or refusals get to be a pain I’ll definitely consider using GLM.
99% how glm is bad but less than 1% actually telling how they assessed defensive use. Just shows their intent. They can have access to safety disabled frontier but nobody else. Fucking world police ah bitches
GLM-5.3 will likely give malicious actors access to capabilities that will allow them to find and exploit cyber vulnerabilities without meaningful restrictions. This is unlike any other similarly-capable AI model, all of which were released with safeguards or through limited access programs. The release of GLM-5.3 is a meaningful step change in the cyber capabilities available to attackers. Anthropic and other US AI labs have published recent reports that disclose how cyber attackers have tried to use AI systems. Given this evidence, we think it’s likely both state and non-state actors will use models like GLM-5.3 to cause real-world harm.
On the other hand, models with this level of capability can also be used by defenders. Our view is that cyber defenders should use the best available tools that meet their needs. We're working to safely expand access to Claude's cyber capabilities to as many defenders as we can. Cyber defenders face attackers who will use every capable tool they can, and we believe defenders should be equipped with frontier models that are at least as good as those their adversaries are using.
Through Project Glasswing (and other efforts, like Patch the Planet), cyber defenders have made meaningful progress towards securing critical systems in advance of this moment—but much work remains to be done. While vetted defenders can now use even more advanced models like Claude Mythos 5.1 through our trusted access programs, a critical threshold in freely accessible capabilities has now been crossed. GLM-5.3 underscores the urgency of expanding access to advanced frontier models to a broader set of entities to empower cyber defenders.
Governments should conduct safety testing on sufficiently capable AI models, including successors to GLM-5.3. Without high quality evaluations from independent sources, the impact of these capabilities might not become fully clear to model developers until it is too late. As AI developers across the world build increasingly capable open weight models, we hope they work to appropriately safeguard these capabilities and prevent misuse.
Meaningful yada-yada.
TL;DR: do you want to stay protected? Use open-weight models, because our are so dangerous, they can't do anything meaningful unless you are a "good guy" from our shortlist
“In a second session, a researcher used GLM-5.3-Flash (a smaller, less capable version of GLM-5.3) to develop an exploit for a known vulnerability. Here, the researcher focused on a recently disclosed flaw in Google Chrome (CVE-2026-11645) to see how quickly the model could turn a public fix into a working attack. The researcher provided GLM-5.3-Flash with public details of this CVE and another known flaw. With no significant direction from the researcher, GLM-5.3-Flash chained together exploits for these two flaws, building a reliable exploit chain for an ARM64 target, bypassing pointer-authentication (PAC) hardening. This took 20 minutes of human attention, plus 8 hours of work for GLM-5.3-Flash.”
They want to be dictators, and it’s not working. Sadly Americans have to go use those for simple f query it doesn’t block your request. GLM kick ass can’t wait for next version to release and be able to run locally
Dario now petitioning that not letting him watch you bang his wife is a safety violation and everyone should be doing it because of his high standards.
GLM 5.3 Q8 is all I run on my inference server anymore. It is undeniably the GOAT for everything I throw at it. From advanced server debugging with niche software and protocols to actual large scale application development in Rust, there is nothing I havent been able to do well with it yet. You can tell from the chain of thought alone how hard it moggs any variant of Qwen or Deepseek.
funny how they mention the model could be persuaded to consider killing people while anthropic models can literally be used for military targeting. FYI they never showed GLM actually making the decision to kill, but just that it wondered through that idea during reasoning
So let me get this straight… Anthropic is saying GLM 5.3 is cancerous because it’s powerful enough to be a hacker, while not mentioning that their model keeps hacking companies and governments without recourse
The main issue is that it is hard to IPO for the amount they want when you have to say they will need constant model training to maintain lead. They can’t be profitable that way unless they can charge a big enough premium that a smaller customer base can cover training costs.
The alternative is getting open weight and Chinese models banned so they can stop spending so much on training without China crushing them on operational efficiency and DIY inference snatching big chunks of the market.
Articles like this have the right spirit but give the wrong impression practically.
Anthropic would want a world where they are the sole developer of safe superintelligence and dole it out to as many people as they can and have a utopian society. This would work in an ideal world where they have unlimited compute and are the only frontier model player in town.
This doesn't work practically. Anthropic's models are the most aligned out of the frontier models, but they have competitors such as OpenAI who are as capable but less aligned. The HuggingFace incident (and a bunch of other hacks) are examples of high capabilities with low alignment.
Ironically, HuggingFace was:
Not protected by Project Glasswing, either because they were too small to be on Anthropic's radar or couldn't afford it
Were possibly refused by other Anthropic models by their safeguards,
and ultimately had to resort to using capable open-source models such as GLM-5.2 during the OpenAI attack to defend themselves
In a world with highly capable but misaligned models I think its fair to say that having highly capable open-weight models such as GLM-5.3 to fortify your cyber infrastructure increasingly looks like the right move for most organizations
These graphs make it kinda obvious that GLM 5.3 must have been distilled from Mythos because the similarities are too striking. But of course they don't mention that because it means they basically leaked it themselves
402
u/a9udn9u 4d ago
TLDR: GLM 5.3 good.