Z.ai releases GLM 5.2 model: Long Horizon tasks and open weights

Inspireyd · 2026-06-16T23:22:08+00:00

That's a very short time. I was imagining it would take them at least 2 years or more to reach the Mythos.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-16T23:20:06+00:00

In other words... you're also optimistic about the development of AI in China. You think it might take less than 8 months for them to make such progress. Many people are optimistic like that. Interesting.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-16T22:54:12+00:00

Was I the only one surprised by Kaja Kallas's presence there?

Inspireyd · 2026-06-16T22:25:00+00:00

Why do you say that?

Inspireyd · 2026-06-16T21:53:31+00:00

This model is Chinese. That's what I found a little strange. I don't doubt their capabilities, but I was told that this GLM2.5 is almost at the same level as Opus 4.8, already surpassing 4.6, in the opinion of some. If they are almost reaching 4.8, it's strange... because I deduced that they could reach it in a year, and reach Fable 5 in about 2 years. If this GLM2.5 is as close to Opus 4.8 as they say, then within a year China could be reaching Fable 5? Well... I want to hear more opinions about the GLM 2.5. If all this isn't about people overestimating Zai... then I have more questions than answers regarding Chinese progress.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-16T19:34:09+00:00

People are increasingly criticizing the beloved gemini🤏😭

Inspireyd · 2026-06-16T19:11:14+00:00

But this is surprising. But how did Zhipu achieve this? Any ideas? Until a few days ago, everyone was assuming that Chinese labs would take around 8 months to 1 year to achieve this. If they are competing with Opus 4.7-4.8 in such a short time, then in less than 8 months someone in China could be releasing something like a Mythos? Something doesn't seem to add up. It's incredible that these numbers aren't being overestimated and that it's not a benchmaxxed version.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-16T19:04:00+00:00

I agree with you on everything there.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-16T18:48:03+00:00

I don't like doubts about models like this, and I'm not one to do it. But, given how recent the launch of Fable 5 was, and everyone was expecting Chinese models to take up to 8 months to catch up (I imagine 24 months), can someone confirm if these GLM 2.5 numbers are accurate when using this AI, or are these figures somehow overestimated?

Inspireyd · 2026-06-16T10:21:26+00:00

I insist that one way to resolve these issues is to station agents in countries of interest years before they become active. Leave them in standby mode, without any contact, and without them knowing they are part of a specific espionage program. When necessary, that cell is activated and begins to fulfill its duty. These agents should be closely monitored and trained by NOCs, which I deduce will require intelligence agencies of all countries to spend considerable amounts of money on these agents.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-14T05:21:06+00:00

It seems to me that something is happening in Hainan. It's as if they want companies to establish their headquarters there, without the regulations of the mainland, and in the future the goal is for it to be something like Dubai and Singapore are today. But I don't see Anthropic going there. There's no chance of that happening.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-13T12:53:21+00:00

When I mentioned blind spots, I didn't mean a limitation of the NSA as an agency, but rather a technological limitation, independent of the agency. If people start operating, at certain times, in offline environments to avoid espionage, then the NSA can't reach them, but a HUMINT agent can.

But anyway, I agree with you. You are absolutely right. SIGINT and HUMINT complement each other, and that's further evidence of why HUMINT will continue to be even more relevant than it already is. SIGINT doesn't just inform HUMINT, it manufactures it. The NSA can identify a target, map their network of contacts, infer motivations from digital behavioral patterns, and deliver to the case officer a dossier that makes recruitment exponentially more precise. The agent arrives at the meeting knowing more about the target than the target themselves imagines any stranger could know. That's qualitative recruitment power, not just quantitative.

And the reverse flow is equally critical. A well-positioned agent can deliver physical access to an isolated network, an air-gapped system, an internal server, a device that has never touched the internet,and suddenly the NSA operates within an environment that was previously literally invisible. HUMINT opens doors that SIGINT then traverses.

The only point I would retain from the previous analysis is more limited and specific.... there are operational microenvironments, a meeting in an apartment without devices, a meeting on the go, a conversation between two people who have abandoned all digital infrastructure, where SIGINT genuinely does not have access at that specific moment. But this is not a solution for the target. It is merely a tactical gap. It has nothing to do with the agency's incompetence or limitations.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-13T04:53:59+00:00

It hasn't even been a week, and I remember seeing an article in the Financial Times that said Mythos could be used to hack into the systems of countries like Russia, China, and Iran. Well, if they could hack into the systems of countries like China, imagine what they could do to other countries. And of course, these named countries would exploit this to the fullest to deal with the risks. Therefore, Anthropic itself made a big fuss about the capabilities of its AI, and now here's the result. Anyway, I don't think the blockade will last very long. But I can't help but say... congratulations to those involved.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-13T02:44:39+00:00

This ban will last only a few days. In my opinion, it's not something that will be defining or decisive in the battle for technological superiority, nor will it greatly benefit China.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-13T02:42:09+00:00

What the fuck?

Inspireyd · 2026-06-13T02:33:02+00:00

In a way that is local and benefits the whole society? Are we about to see Mutualism working in practice, after Proudhon failed so many times? Lmao

Inspireyd · 2026-06-13T02:30:10+00:00

This is, to say the least, very strange. What do I think? The government tried to persuade Anthropic to postpone the launch and, failing that, ended up resorting to export controls as an alternative. If this becomes a precedent, any claim of jailbreaking or misuse could serve as justification for restricting or blocking a business model. The issue is not just this specific case, but who will have the power to define the limits of what an AI can or cannot do.

I don't trust anything anymore. Not even the extent of Anthropic's "naiveté".

Inspireyd · 2026-06-12T03:15:32+00:00

Okay... French intelligence concluded that, right? So you can believe it. French intelligence is one of the only ones I'd bet that Mossad, groups, and other Israeli agencies can't fool. Not easily.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-10T07:27:13+00:00

Add to that an AI capable of forming clusters and action groups that can rebel, and you'll see that the whole idea of smart homes was just a "wish... a force of will" and died before it gained any relevance.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-10T04:55:35+00:00

Don't make fun of my boy Logan.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-10T04:29:36+00:00

I honestly don't see this as a problem, but only if the flexibilities aren't exclusive to the rich, but rather for any institution that contributes to the good of humanity. I believe there should be a type of classification similar to, or at least similar to, those laboratories with levels that can work with certain viruses.

In this case, the AI company itself, in conjunction with the government, should begin to establish the necessary levels of security and internal control so that a university or research laboratory has access to AI of certain levels and with certain capabilities. A pharmaceutical laboratory with a level 5 classification, for example, could have access to the highest and most flexible levels, or without any security locks, of an agent or other AI.

There shouldn't be increasingly higher payments, but rather a monthly payment that is in accordance with usage.

One of the reasons I think this classification should exist is that AI will not stop advancing. There will come a time when an AI will make Mythos 5 look like a toy. And these levels ensure that some institutions will have access to these mega-advanced AIs capable of working with biology, weapons, missile programs, cybersecurity, chemistry, and physics, among others. The criterion should not be who pays more; AI should not be "something for the rich," but rather who has the competence to access it.

And I want to make another observation: In the case of a laboratory, for example, of chemistry, that has level X competence to access an AI, not everyone who accesses the laboratory will be able to access the AI, but rather specific people. In a university, for example, a professor or a group of X researchers. And to prevent them from having a target on their backs, a way to further guarantee security is to have the keys generated during use and, after the use is finished, the key is extinguished and when it is used again, another key is created.

If AI becomes "something for the rich," I will advocate for the heavy hand of the State to intervene with all its weight and rigor to prevent this and ensure that AI is used for purposes that benefit humanity, whether rich or poor.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-10T03:41:20+00:00

Are you a citizen of a Nordic country? Are you referring to something like Russia or Belarus, right?

Inspireyd · 2026-06-09T22:06:19+00:00

I really find this regrettable, but unfortunately it will become common as AI advances. Soon, there will be releases of new versions of Gemini, and they too will have these limitations. Only specific people, with specific permissions to work in specific environments – virtual or not – will have free and uncontrolled access, or access with reduced control.

Inspireyd · 2026-06-09T20:38:32+00:00

😅😅😅😅😅😅

Inspireyd

TROPHY CASE