Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL

arxiv.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 1001 posts

Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL

#201

Post by tokioyoyo »

msp26 wrote: post #79

How can openai justify their $200/mo subscriptions if a model like this exists at an incredibly low price point? Operator? I've been impressed in my brief personal testing and the model ranks very highly across most benchmarks (when controlled for style it's tied number one on lmarena). It's also hilarious that openai explicitly prevented users from seeing the CoT tokens on the o1 model (which you still pay for btw)…

From my casual read, right now everyone is on reputation tarnishing tirade, like spamming “Chinese stealing data! Definitely lying about everything! API can’t be this cheap!”. If that doesn’t go through well, I’m assuming lobbyism will start for import controls, which is very stupid.

I have no idea how they can recover from it, if DeepSeek’s product is what they’re advertising.

Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL

#202

Post by claiir »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #152

DeepSeek-R1 has apparently caused quite a shock wave in SV ... https://venturebeat.com/ai/why-everyone-in-ai-is-freaking-ou...

"mogged" in an actual piece of journalism... perhaps fitting

> DeepSeek undercut or “mogged” OpenAI by connecting this powerful reasoning [..]

Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL

#203

Post by dtquad »

mrtksn wrote: post #182
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #152

DeepSeek-R1 has apparently caused quite a shock wave in SV ... https://venturebeat.com/ai/why-everyone-in-ai-is-freaking-ou...

Correct me if I'm wrong but if Chinese can produce the same quality at %99 discount, then the supposed $500B investment is actually worth $5B. Isn't that the kind wrong investment that can break nations? Edit: Just to clarify, I don't imply that this is public money to be spent. It will commission $500B worth of human and material resources for 5 years that can be much more productive if used for something else - i.e…

Sigh, I don't understand why they had to do the $500 billion announcement with the president. So many people now wrongly think Trump just gave OpenAI $500 billion of the taxpayers' money.

Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL

#204

Post by eunos »

cbg0 wrote: post #151

Aside from the usual Tiananmen Square censorship, there's also some other propaganda baked-in: https://prnt.sc/HaSc4XZ89skA (from reddit)

I am not surprised if US Govt would mandate "Tiananmen-test" for LLMs in the future to have "clean LLM". Anyone working for federal govt or receiving federal money would only be allowed to use "clean LLM"

Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL

#205

Post by mrtksn »

dtquad wrote: post #203
mrtksn wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct me if I'm wrong but if Chinese can produce the same quality at %99 discount, then the supposed $500B investment is actually worth $5B. Isn't that the kind wrong investment that can break nations? Edit: Just to clarify, I don't imply that this is public money to be spent. It will commission $500B worth of human and material resources for 5 years that can be much more productive if used for something else - i.e…

Sigh, I don't understand why they had to do the $500 billion announcement with the president. So many people now wrongly think Trump just gave OpenAI $500 billion of the taxpayers' money.

I don't say that at all. Money spent on BS still sucks resources, no matter who spends that money. They are not going to make the GPU's from 500 billion dollar banknotes, they will pay people $500B to work on this stuff which means people won't be working on other stuff that can actually produce value worth more than the $500B.

I guess the power plants are salvageable.

Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL

#206

Post by inertiatic »

buryat wrote: post #84

Interacting with this model is just supplying your data over to an adversary with unknown intents. Using an open source model is subjecting your thought process to be programmed with carefully curated data and a systems prompt of unknown direction and intent.

>Interacting with this model is just supplying your data over to an adversary with unknown intents

Skynet?

Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL

#207

Post by ThouYS »

buyucu wrote: post #131

I'm impressed by not only how good deepseek r1 is, but also how good the smaller distillations are. qwen-based 7b distillation of deepseek r1 is a great model too. the 32b distillation just became the default model for my home server.

tried the 7b, it switched to chinese mid-response

Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL

#208

Post by itsoktocry »

mrtksn wrote: post #182
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #152

DeepSeek-R1 has apparently caused quite a shock wave in SV ... https://venturebeat.com/ai/why-everyone-in-ai-is-freaking-ou...

Correct me if I'm wrong but if Chinese can produce the same quality at %99 discount, then the supposed $500B investment is actually worth $5B. Isn't that the kind wrong investment that can break nations? Edit: Just to clarify, I don't imply that this is public money to be spent. It will commission $500B worth of human and material resources for 5 years that can be much more productive if used for something else - i.e…

$500 billion is $500 billion.

If new technology means we can get more for a dollar spent, then $500 billion gets more, not less.

Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL

#209

Post by throwaway314155 »

jona-f wrote: post #180
MostlyStable wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently the censorship isn't baked-in to the model itself, but rather is overlayed in the public chat interface. If you run it yourself, it is significantly less censored [0] [0] https://thezvi.substack.com/p/on-deepseeks-r1?open=false#%C2...

Oh, my experience was different. Got the model through ollama. I'm quite impressed how they managed to bake in the censorship. It's actually quite open about it. I guess censorship doesnt have as bad a rep in china as it has here? So it seems to me that's one of the main achievements of this model. Also another finger to anyone who said they can't publish their models cause of ethical reasons. Deepseek demonstrated c…

> I guess censorship doesnt have as bad a rep in china as it has here

It's probably disliked, just people know not to talk about it so blatantly due to chilling effects from aforementioned censorship.

disclaimer: ignorant American, no clue what i'm talking about.

Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL

#210

Post by itsoktocry »

mrtksn wrote: post #205
dtquad wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sigh, I don't understand why they had to do the $500 billion announcement with the president. So many people now wrongly think Trump just gave OpenAI $500 billion of the taxpayers' money.

I don't say that at all. Money spent on BS still sucks resources, no matter who spends that money. They are not going to make the GPU's from 500 billion dollar banknotes, they will pay people $500B to work on this stuff which means people won't be working on other stuff that can actually produce value worth more than the $500B. I guess the power plants are salvageable.

Deepseek didn't train the model on sheets of paper, there are still infrastructure costs.
Post reply on HN