hulk-konen

Right now it's really not offered by third parties. I found it via a single provider (BitDeer). I'm not sure I'd trust them with my customers' data. Also, considering the model is getting a bit old, I wouldn't expect them to keep offering it forever.

Anyhow, competition is fierce. I'll have some model I can use in the future, even if it's not dirt cheap like current Mistral Large is.

I actually use Mistral Large to go through some large text chunks (in production). It gives about the same level of results as Sonnet, while being 90% cheaper. Definitely wouldn't use it for coding, but for this text-analyzing task it has been great. Much better than all the latest Chinese models, for example.

So I was waiting for this release and it's... 5x more expensive than the latest Mistral Large. So now I'm worried they'll pull the plug on the cheap Large when their releases roll over to that one.

Some variation of this is the way.

You should not get dependent on one black box. Companies will exploit that dependency.

My version of this is having CC Pro, Cursor Pro, and OpenCode (with $10 to Codex/GLM 5.1) --> total $50. My work doesn't stop if one of these is having overloaded servers, etc. And it's definitely useful to have them cross-checking each other's plans and work.

I think this will be the year of the Linux then.

Native photo editor with decent ux was the missing piece.

I think GLM 5.1 is a step above M2.7 and Qwen 3.6. I’ve used it to do some planning when I ran out of Opus usage, and it’s done ok job. Wouldn’t trust it with some more difficult data shape edits etc., but it’s a nice option to have!

Composer 2, M2.7, and Qwen 3.6 are all capable to execute those plans just fine.

I’m using LLMs to set up risk models for startups and SMBs (where there are no internal resources yet). It works.

I have a risk mapping tool live here: https://siqnalis.com/company (You can test it with “beta2026”.)

One model is live, but a lot of stuff is on the roadmap.

This takes me back.

I used to run a coffee roastery and roasted several thousand batches. This is pretty much how it works. I spent hours of trying to match those curves to the target profile.

Back in the day we had software called Artisan and a few probes inside the machine. It would have benefited of from having much more data being recorded.

For example: environment humidity, the number of the batch (machine itself heats, so batch 1 of the day is very different than batch 11), bean temp and moisture before going in, actions the roaster takes etc.

It seems like I have forgotten some nuances.

Yes

I hope they make this in ATX (or mATX) form factor, toss out all the size, energy, and heat concerns, and add more ports and interfaces.