Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- So "Europe's Leading AI Model" is just a modified Chinese model which does worse than the better Chinese models?
It seems Europe is many years behind in tech. Maybe for AI models they are just a decade behind, but as far as producing hardware capable to run SOA models they lag tens of years.
by DeathArrow - What about producing hardware capable of producing hardware capable of SOA models?by vrganj
- What I want is a model that is trained with data that is openly available, where the data is curated by academia. I don't want corporate crap in my AI (unless it has been filtered properly).by amelius
- There are models that do that, for example the Olmo family of models, although they have Gemma 3 performance levels for that matter.by dorkypunk
- I'm ready to stand corrected, but I'm pretty positive that such a process would require 1) an insane amount of work and 2) wouldn't produce anything close to SOTA results because of the lack of training data.
It is my understanding that - sadly - the insane amount of copyrighted works and corporate crap is a prerequisite for having a corpus that is big enough
by thevinter - As a European: I don’t care where an open weight model comes from.by trvz
- Issue is that it is extremely hard to notice if there is backdoor or some training-related hallucinations that are completely random.
E.g. I had random, completely unrelated and irrelevant fetch by Qwen3.8 27B to " https://routify-file-proxy-sg.oss-ap-southeast-1.aliyuncs.co..." and I only noticed it because I have allowlist rules for what they can do.
by nicce - This is an oft-expressed refrain. But there are good reasons to not want to use Chinese models (or models from any adversary for that matter).
1. They may be trained, in theory, to inject subtle back-doors into certain kinds of generated code.
2. They may be also trained to include back-doors when deployed in public-facing services where user can provide text or image input.
3. Chained with (2) they may be also trained to exploit their inference environments, which though a big feat, not outside the capability of nation-state hackers.
by never_inline - I do care, because those models can contain backdoors and 'open weight' models can require specialized hardware to run in the future.by jooops1
- I hope you're aware that it's likley in the future open weight models will output tokens/commands that aren't in your interest. It could be that models are trained with spionage in mind and models could only target specific input token patterns, time zones, ip addresses, names etc... You will be able to see the output tokens but things will become so complex that you won't notice its intentions. Maybe there will be some sort of output token scanning software/llm (let's call it a modern form of a virus scanner) that validates intentions. In the end, I'm just trying to say that open weight means you have a black box in front of you that you don't know what it does. Therefore, the training material of open weight models should be known. While it doesn't matter where the model comes from, it certainly matters whether you trust those people if you don't have the training material.
- The problem is always the next model, or the one after. If china thinks it's beneficial to stop open weight releases, it will stop them. Then you are stranded on that one and no local industry to produce new models for you.by jo909
- As a European: I do, because I'm not oblivious to geopolitics or digital sovereignty.by RamblingCTO
- As a European, I do. I don’t envy the state that has to buy all its water and food from its aggressive, militarized neighbour.by espadrine
- As a non-European, I care. I definitely want choice in this matter, as too many things can be baked into models that we can't really know until it comes up.
For instance, I heard one of the Chinese models has some interesting "history" "facts" built into it. That's major, and can influence a lot more than just asking it for that particular history lesson.
I don't want just 1 LLM. I want a great LLM from every major region. I will probably still prefer my own region, but I still want the others to be an option.
by wccrawford - It is beyond me how they managed to acquire such funding. Sounds a lot like an earlier quantum computing effort which pivoted to "AI" as well: https://zapataquantum.comby konradha
- Multiverse Computing is one of the weirdest companies I've encountered here in Europe/Spain. Their product / job application descriptions are just technobabble.
Despite my doubts I applied to one of their positions a couple of years back only to receive a super late and generic "we are not moving forward" mail (I'd say I fit pretty damn well for the position, but it seems to be the new normal that most companies don't even want to chat with people 99% of the time).
by V1ndaar - This has to be fake... or similar.
Their CMO's bio lists "20,000 'qualified' quantum AI contacts on linkedin" as the SECOND line in his bio.
"Business Management by ESADE. Co-Founder and CMO of Multiverse Computing. President, “barcelonaqbit-bqb”, 20,000 “qualified” quantum AI contacts on LinkedIn. VP of the AMETIC Innovation..."
by tevon - Isn't this standard in Europe? There exists a layer of well-connected and impenetrable managerial class, shielded by a glass ceiling. The entire company is BS, and they use some folks with clout and credentials to access grants and handouts (or whatever inscrutable financial reasons). They often sell products to each others' companies or big Euro vendors.
Even if this fits the spirit of corruption, I'm not sure it fits the spirit of it. They certainly aren't there to build a product or provide valuable expertise, but taxes and salaries are paid, people go to conferences, they might even build something, but its a giant LARP. Don't expect to get rewarded or recognized for solid engineering.
I'm sure if you worked for a mid-sized Euro firm, you know what I'm talking about.
by torginus - Didn't know the "Highest scoring EU model" has a low bar, lower than Qwen3.8-27B, but still congratulations on the milestone, hopefully next iterations will get better from hereby throwaw12
- i mean qwen3.8 is a technical marvelby nicman23
- It is surprising given how many parameters it has that it scores so low. But, hopefully this will build up domestic talent and understanding and let Europe compete on the world stage with this.by Schlagbohrer
- When the weights are closed I don't believe any benchmark.
I just got Qwen3.8-27B to score extra 10% on SWE Pro by adding a proxy in front of it that has few simple "harness like features": - when the model gets stuck it tells it to "go on" - when it sends no output, malformed json, slips to wrong tool use format, etc it asks it to "try again better" - detects repetition and tells the model. - injects a prompt about "planning tool use" when it seems to be using same tools repeatedly. - injects a reminder it can use tools if there are no tool uses for over X messages.
10% - with just that.
I have more to test. My point is, open weights models get tested on naked model quality. "Frontier" models get tested as a model + whatever secret sauce they choose to put in front.
by Roark66 - Have you posted the code to this proxy somewhere? I'm dabbling in custom harnesses and would love to learn from it.by Wheen
- I do not want open weight models from China to be the only viable locally hosted things (deepseek v4 flash 0731 Q8, qwen 3.8-flash-next Q8, GLM-5.3-Flash) in the under 200GB RAM class.
I want to see things like Mistral and Laguna (non-CN) succeed. I have spent about a week using Laguna S 2.1 as a test and while I wasn't blown away by its capabilities, it's also totally acceptable for many purposes.
I do hope these Quasar people learn that if you announce a new model and it already performs worse than things people can go download from huggingface, and/or buy access to with very cheap token plans via openrouter or opencode.. If your new model is API only and people can't download/examine it, it will get very little uptake and real world use.
I can see it as a niche market for european sovereignty stuff if absolutely necessary, hosted and run in Europe, sure. Same as Mistral. That's a niche which exists, there's probably enough room for a couple of modestly sized companies doing it... I guess?
by walrus01 - > That's a niche which exists
It's not a small niche. Anything touching European resident personal data must only be done by Euro AI Act compliant AIs. So, hosted in Europe at least (unclear to me rn, would love to learn the exact criteria).
by ovi256 - I understood from informal chatter that researchers in the top Chinese labs are pretty open with sharing knowledge with each other. Additionally, it seems that anywhere between 30-50% of key researchers in the top US labs are ethnically Chinese. I wonder if this situation might give Chinese labs/researches some advantage just due to language and informal networks. Chinese researchers can understand all the English research, but research in Chinese is far less accessible to non-Chinese.by em500
- I wish for this company to have great models. I am glad to see such good scores.
I see they have a HuggingFace account[0] and they fine-tuned GPT-OSS, Nemotron, and Qwen, in the past under new names.
There are some things about it that make me worry though.
• They don't indicate the active parameter count, or indicate whether they pretrained the model. It could be a MiniMax M3 finetuning, as the parameter count almost matches (435B vs. 438B).
• They mention using quantum algorithms in other projects: https://multiversecomputing.com/singularity despite quantum algorithms not being typically useful currently.
It would not be the first company with a splashy release, like Brampton Intelligence[1], or SubQ[2]. Unlike those, they do seem to have experience fine-tuning models. Regardless of my worries, I am rooting for them to learn how to train models.
[0]: https://huggingface.co/MultiverseComputingCAI
by espadrine - "quantum algorithms" that would put them directly on a blacklist if I had one. They might as well directly promote their stuff with Cold Fusion and Snake Oil.
- The company sounds like a bunch of hot air to me. From their about page:
> At the heart of Multiverse's platform is CompactifAI, a compression technology that applies tensor networks, a mathematical framework from quantum physics, to the problem of AI model compression. This application was pioneered by co-founder and Chief Scientific Officer Dr. Román Orús and reduces the size of large language models by up to 80-95% with immaterial accuracy loss.
Ironic, considering they are releasing a 438B model that loses to a 27B one. From another part:
> Singularity Machine Learning is a cloud service that uses quantum machine learning for solving supervised learning problems.
I wouldn't be surprised if these guys just finetuned an open Chinese model and called it a day.
by pu_pe - looks like someone is looking for EU funding :Dby m00dy