The 4 emdashes are in the headline, the introtext below the headline, in the author bio, and the site 's footer — all of them might have been inserted by the website editor, not the original author.
Does "major number release" mean that it is actually an order of magnitude more compute effort that went into creating this model?
Or is this fundamentally a different model architecture, or a completely new tech stack on top of which this model was created (and the computing effort was actually less than before, in the v3 major relase?
Seems that I cannot use GLM-5 via the API yet, because I am on the Coding-Lite Plan, the most basic paid tier.
I have also realized that I get faster and correct answer to the ascii_downcase question (even from GLM-4.7) when I submit to open.bigmodel.cn endpoint rather than the z.ai API endpoints (using the same API key). I get a mix of Chinese and Western characters in error responses from open.bigmodel.cn though, while the z.ai endpoint does only contain Western Characters.
(Just assuming that both websites are operated by the same company).
There is a well-known CLI tool for JSON processing called jq.
I have just asked GLM-4.7 for the name of jq's built function to convert a string to lowercase. It is called ascii_downcase() according to the manual:
However GLM-4.7 insists that is called ascii_down().
I tried to correct it and gave the exact version number, but still, after a long internal monologue, This is its final world:
"In standard jq version 1.7, the function is named ascii_down, not ascii_downcase.
If you are receiving an error that ascii_down is not defined, please verify your version with jq --version. It is possible you are using a different binary (like gojq) or a version older than 1."
GLM-5 gives me the correct answer, ascii_downcase, but I can get this in the Chat Window. Via the API I get HTTP Status 429 - too many requests.
How many Microsoft employees are working on Azure Linux in 2026 (full-time equivalents)?
Github Project Page lists ~ 195 contributors today.
Is Azure Linux relying on community contributions, and MS employees do not write code, justt review, plan, coordinate?
Or is it the other way around, Microsoft developers do most of the work, and occasionally accept a small PR and interesting feature requests from the community, here and there?
There is a section "The Future" which talks about Artificial Intelligence (AI):
The author postulates that if computer scientists develop intelligent machines that can do all things better than humans, all work will be done by machines and no human effort will be necessary.
There are two possibilities: either the machines make all their own decisions without human oversight or human control over the machines is retained.
173. If machines _are_ allowed to make all their own decisions, it is impossible to predict the outcome and the fate of the human race would be at the mercy of the machines. The author suggests that society may become so dependent on machines that it would have no practical choice but to accept all of their decisions, eventually leading to a stage where machines are in effective control and turning them off would amount to suicide.
174. If human control over machines is _retained_, the average person may have control over certain private machines, but control over large systems of machines will be in the hands of a tiny elite. The elite will have greater control over the masses and because human work will no longer be necessary, the masses will be superfluous.
If computer scientists do not succeed in developing artificial intelligence and human work remains necessary, machines will still take care of simpler tasks resulting in an increasing surplus of human workers at lower levels of ability. Employed workers will face ever-increasing demands and will need more training, ability and conformity. Their tasks will be increasingly specialized and out of touch with the real world.
The author envisions scenarios where machines take over most important work while humans are kept busy with relatively unimportant work in the service industries, which the author finds contemptible.
The author acknowledges that the outlined scenarios do not exhaust all possibilities but indicates that if the industrial-technological system survives the next 40 to 100 years, individuals will be more dependent on large organizations and their physical and mental qualities will be engineered into them.
Technology is creating a new physical and social environment for humans that is radically different from the environments to which natural selection has adapted the human race and humans will either be adjusted to this new environment by being artificially re-engineered or through natural selection.
179. The author concludes that it would be better to dump the whole system and take the consequences.
(That was all summarized by ChatGPT. I have removed concluding sentences from some paragraphs containing deeply pessimistic motives of insubordination, enslavement, and extermination)
In web programming, it might sometimes be useful to write your own polyfill when you need to add a single feature for backward-compatibility reasons. Well, a third-party polyfill library that provides that missing feature perfectly might be available. However, the library is too big (with respect to file size) or adds too much complexity during the build process (by pulling in lots of other dependencies).