← Back to context

Comment by Systemerror7A69

4 hours ago

It's gonna be interesting to see the final version, since this is a preview model still. I'm not completely sure as to how this works, but from what I gathered it will be further trained during this period, so it might improve a bit.

Since cost is so much higher than deepseek though it really seems like the biggest reason to use it would be "in the mistral subscription" for personal use or "because you need to abide by european data privacy laws" for companies.

Mostly I'm happy they're still in competition, as I mentioned already elsewhere.

Are they still in competition? Or are they a government sanctioned monopoly? I’m not sure that will be competitive. There are no market forces to do so but pride.

  • You are severely misusing the term monopoly.

    There is demand for AI that is not US or China controlled. Mistral is serving that demand.

  • A lot of national defense stuff is a de facto "government sanctioned monopoly" and this is certainly the same flavor. Market forces are different if the industry is perceived to be vital to continued sovereignty.

  • Which government? Sanctioned how? What stops other European companies from competing with Mistral? Is the situation better in the US?

  • That's rich coming from a country who's top AI contender just announced 80B in yearly losses. Looks a lot like a subsidised duopoly to me.

    • Who's subsidizing it?

      Also what about SpaceX, Meta and Google? They are clearly still in the game. They are all ahead of Mistral.

  • I mean, the model architecture is basically that of GLM 5.3 with slightly more parameters and slightly more active parameters, so it should probably be able to beat GLM 5.3 enough post-training.

  • Actually, with Trump in the Office, "AI/Data Sovereignty" is quite a strong market forces. From Europe point-of-view, any US company is a potential risk (hello Starlink)

    ;-)