Im wording my question in a roundabout way, I assumed you found some way to supercharge the old models intelligence with your harness, now I see its just a default choice and that v3 doesnt have magical properties thanks to the elixir fork of the harness
plcholder
mudasobwa
Creator of Cure
To some extent I did, actually. The harness drastically decreases the needed number of frictions and interactions, so I am good with v3 most of the time.
1
dbraxton
Nice, but not sure whether you have seen this GitHub - deepseek-ai/deepseek-harness: DeepSeek Harness: Everything is a Plugin. · GitHub
0
mudasobwa
Creator of Cure
I am not sure what this project has in common with mine, save for words “DeepSeek” and “Harness.”
0
bjtflq
Well, that’s a pretty significant similarity. I almost skipped your post because I thought it was the same harness from DeepSeek that I looked at last week. Both projects also use the same acronym, DSH. It might be worth considering a name change to avoid confusion. That said, it looks pretty interesting.
0
tmbb
Is it hard to make this work with OpenRouter? How commited are you to having this only work with the DeepSeek API?
0
Kevo
I would second the advice to change the name. If it does catch on that will become an issue at some point.
If you don’t have another name you like, maybe we could brain storm some ideas and help out?
0
webofbits
AFAIK this is why it’s not model agnostic but maybe I missed anywhere in this thread where we’re heading into a different direction
1
mudasobwa
Creator of Cure
OpenRouter is something I might support. As well as local models per se. Let me check and come back to you.
I am not committed to support DeepSeek only, I am committed to never support OpenAI/Anthropic.
1
mudasobwa
Creator of Cure
How is that? DeepSeek is gonna sue me?
After all, the release is a binary executable. Fell free to rename it to whatever of your choice locally.
0