For the record, I don't believe that K3 is a distillation of Fable at all. But I do believe the director when he says that Kimi and other Chinese frontier labs obtained access to Fable and used various proxies to evade detection. This was likely for benchmarking & evaluation purposes, but it could have also included a small amount of distillation, per Musk's comment that "all AI labs distill from all other AI labs."why would you give any credence to this nonsense?
distillation on a small scale is very common in the AI industry. Elon even said this recently. Most of the so called distillation from Chinese labs of Claude models were done against Opus months ago. The Chinese models are now good enough and getting enough hard problem through these API calls that they generate enough synthetic data to no longer need distillation.
Think about it this way:
if you distill by passing a problem to Fable and then get output/solution. You can get a just as good solution/output from running it against GLM-5.2 or Kimi-3. So, do you actually need to run Closed source models from distillation? It seems you don't.
Now, you probably do want to do api calls against Fable and GPT-5.6 models for benchmark purposes. But it's hard for me to see justification that distillation of Fable at this point can still lead to significant improvement to model development.
This is why I keep talking about RSI. If you achieve self improvement, then you don't need to distill off other people's models.
I also think that explains why Chinese labs have not been vocal in denying these allegations. Because if it's an industry wide practice that is being used for propaganda, then there's no value in getting into these arguments as they are just a way for the US to score PR on you.
