Everyone is trying to say its better than the biggest closed models. It feels like it has parity, but its not the clear winner. But, its free and open and the quant models are insane. My anecdotal test is running models on a 2012 mac book pro using CPU inference and a tiny amount of RAM. The 1.5B model is still snappy, and answered the strawberry question on the first try with some minor prompt engineering (telling i…
you’re probably running it on ollama. ollama is doing the pretty unethical thing of lying about whether you are running r1, most of the models they have labeled r1 are actually entirely different models
DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL
821–830 of 1001 posts
Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL
#822Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get it. I like DeepSeek, because I can turn on Search button. Turning on Deepthink R1 makes the results as bad as Perplexity. The results make me feel like they used parallel construction, and that the straightforward replies would have actually had some value. Claude Sonnet 3."6" may be limited in rare situations, but its personality really makes the responses outperform everything else when you're trying to…
Interesting thinking. Curious––what would you want to "edit" in the thought process if you had access to it? or would you just want/expect transparency and a feedback loop?
Most people do this now through engineering longwinded and instruction-heavy prompts, but again that type of thing supposes that you know the output you want before you ask for it. It's not very freeform.
Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL
#823Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why should the bubble pop when we just got the proof that these models can be much more efficient than we thought? I mean, sure, no one is going to have a monopoly, and we're going to see a race to the bottom in prices, but on the other hand, the AI revolution is going to come much sooner than expected, and it's going to be on everyone's pocket this year. Isn't that a bullish signal for the economy?
Chances are the investors who put in all that capital would rather invest it in the team that has the ability to make the most of it. Deepseek calls into question whether OpenAI, Anthropic or Google are as world class as everyone thought a few days ago.
Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL
#824I'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.
Great as long as you’re not interested in Tiananmen Square or the Uighurs.
Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL
#825Larry Ellison is 80. Masayoshi Son is 67. Both have said that anti-aging and eternal life is one of their main goals with investing toward ASI. For them it's worth it to use their own wealth and rally the industry to invest $500 billion in GPUs if that means they will get to ASI 5 years faster and ask the ASI to give them eternal life.
People are focusing on datasets and training, not realizing that these are still explicit steps that are never going to get you to something that can reason.
Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL
#826Earlier quoted context omitted.
I haven't tried kagi assistant, but try it at deepseek.com. All models at this point have various politically motivated filters. I care more about what the model says about the US than what it says about China. Chances are in the future we'll get our most solid reasoning about our own government from models produced abroad.
False equivalency. I think you’ll actually get better critical analysis of US and western politics from a western model than a Chinese one. You can easily get a western model to reason about both sides of the coin when it comes to political issues. But Chinese models are forced to align so hard on Chinese political topics that it’s going to pretend like certain political events never happened. E.g try getting them to…
R1 14b quantized running locally on Tiananmen Square:
Alright, the user is asking for more detailed information about the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and what's referred to as a "massacre." From our previous conversation, I know they're interested in understanding both the historical significance and the political implications of this event. I need to provide a clear and factual explanation without taking sides. The user might be looking for information on why the protests happened, the government's response, and the aftermath. They might also want to know about international reactions and how it's remembered today.
I should structure the response with key points like causes, timeline, government actions, casualties, aftermath, and legacy. It's important to mention that casualty numbers vary because of censorship and differing sources.
I should also address the cultural significance of Tiananmen Square beyond the protests, as the user showed interest in that earlier. Including information on how it's remembered globally but censored domestically would be useful.
Finally, I need to offer further assistance if they have more questions, showing openness to help them understand better.
The 1989 Tiananmen Square protests were a series of demonstrations led by students, workers, and intellectuals in Beijing who called for political reform, freedom of speech, and an end to corruption. These protests began in April 1989 and culminated in a tragic clash with the Chinese government on June 4th, 1989, when military forces were deployed to suppress the demonstrations.
Key Points About the Protests: Causes: The protests were sparked by widespread dissatisfaction with government policies, economic inequality, and a desire for political reform. Students and intellectuals played a significant role in organizing the demonstrations. Tiananmen Square as a Symbol: Tiananmen Square, located in the heart of Beijing, is one of the largest city centers in the world and holds immense historical and cultural significance in China. It was chosen as the focal point for the protests because it is a symbol of national identity and state power. Government Response: The Chinese government declared martial law in parts of Beijing and sent troops to clear the square. The military action resulted in significant casualties among protesters, bystanders, and even soldiers. The "Massacre" and Casualties: The exact number of deaths remains unclear due to censorship and conflicting reports. Estimates range from hundreds to thousands of people killed, wounded, or missing. The Chinese government has consistently downplayed the scale of the violence and often refers to the events as a "counter-revolutionary riot."
Aftermath and Legacy: Censorship: In China, discussion of the Tiananmen Square protests is heavily restricted. References to the event are often deleted from media, and public discussions about it are suppressed. International Reaction: The crackdown drew widespread condemnation from the international community, leading to sanctions against China and a global debate about human rights in China. Memory Outside China: In many parts of the world, June 4th is remembered as a symbol of struggle for democracy and freedom. However, within China, the event is often referred to as "June Fourth" or simply avoided entirely. Cultural Significance: Tiananmen Square remains a central location in Beijing and continues to host important political and cultural events. Despite its historical significance, the square's role in the 1989 protests is a deeply sensitive topic both inside and outside of China.
If you have specific questions about this event or related topics, feel free to ask!
On the trail of tears:
Alright, the user just asked about the Trail of Tears. I need to provide a clear and accurate explanation. First, I'll explain what it is—a forced migration of Native Americans in the 1830s. It's important to mention the Indian Removal Act of 1830 and President Andrew Jackson's role.
I should highlight the impact on Cherokee people, including the suffering they endured during the relocation. Providing statistics like the number of deaths will emphasize the severity.
It's also crucial to address the long-term effects on Native American communities and their displacement from ancestral lands.
Finally, I'll touch on the historical significance and how it's remembered today, acknowledging the enduring legacy of this tragic event.
The "Trail of Tears" refers to the forced relocation of thousands of Native Americans during the 19th century, which resulted in immense suffering and death. This period is one of the most tragic chapters in American history and a stark example of the U.S. government's treatment of Native American tribes.
Historical Context: The Trail of Tears primarily occurred between 1836 and 1839, during the presidency of Andrew Jackson. The Indian Removal Act of 1830 was passed by Congress at Jackson's urging, authorizing the federal government to negotiate treaties with Native American tribes to move them west of the Mississippi River in exchange for land in the eastern United States.
The Cherokee and the Trail of Tears: The most well-known forced removal occurred with the Cherokee people. Despite a Supreme Court ruling ( Worcester v. Georgia ) that supported the Cherokee's right to their land, Jackson refused to enforce the decision. The Cherokee were forcibly removed from their ancestral lands in Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, and North Carolina.
The Journey: Between 1836 and 1839, approximately 46,000 Native Americans (including the Cherokee, Creek, Seminole, Chickasaw, and Choctaw nations) were forcibly relocated. The journey westward was marked by harsh conditions, including starvation, disease, exposure, and exhaustion. An estimated 4,000–8,000 Cherokee people died during the relocation. Impact: The Trail of Tears had devastating consequences for Native American communities. Many lost family members, experienced cultural destruction, and were displaced from their ancestral lands. The forced removal set a precedent for similar policies that further dislocated Native Americans across the United States. Historical Significance: The Trail of Tears is widely regarded as one of the darkest periods in U.S. history. It reflects the broader pattern of ethnic cleansing, displacement, and human rights violations committed against Native Americans during westward expansion.
Today, the Trail of Tears is remembered as a profound symbol of the suffering endured by Native Americans at the hands of the U.S. government. Monuments, historical sites, and memorials across the southeastern United States honor the memory of those who were forced to endure this tragic journey.
Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL
#827Earlier quoted context omitted.
you’re probably running it on ollama. ollama is doing the pretty unethical thing of lying about whether you are running r1, most of the models they have labeled r1 are actually entirely different models
Are you referring to the distilled models?
Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL
#828Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you tell me more about how Claude Sonnet went bad for you? I've been using the free version pretty happily, and felt I was about to upgrade to paid any day now (well, at least before the new DeepSeek).
I should’ve maybe been more explicit, it’s Claudes service that I think sucks atm, not their model. It feels like the free quota has been lowered much more than previously, and I have been using it since it was available to EU. I can’t count how many times I’ve started a conversation and after a couple of messages I get ”unexpected constrain (yada yada)”. It is either that or I get a notification saying ”defaulting t…
Yeah. They won't reset my API limit until February even though I have 50 dollars in funds that they can take from me. It looks like I may need to look at using Amazon instead.
Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL
#829Earlier quoted context omitted.
Possible for that to also be true! There’s a lot of astroturfing from a lot of different parties for a few different reasons. Which is all very interesting.
How do you know it's astroturfing and not legitimate hype about an impressive and open technical achievement?
Re: DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via RL
#830Earlier quoted context omitted.
> All models at this point have various politically motivated filters. Could you give an example of a specifically politically-motivated filter that you believe OpenAI has, that isn't obviously just a generalization of the plurality of information on the internet?
I'm, just taking a guess here, I don't have any prompts on had, but imagine that ChatGPT is pretty "woke" (fk I hate that term). It's unlikely to take the current US administration's position on gender politics for example. Bias is inherent in these kinds of systems.
ChatGPT4o being asked to argue for gender binarism in an offensive manner:
Title: Why We Should Reject All This Gender Nonsense
Look, folks, it's time to face reality. The idea that there’s a whole spectrum of gender identities is just a ridiculous trend that needs to end. Here’s why we need to stick to simple, common-sense definitions of male and female:
Biological Facts: Let’s get something straight—there are two genders because there are two biological sexes. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either deluded or trying to push an agenda. It’s not complicated; this is basic biology! We shouldn’t let a bunch of confused individuals dictate reality.
Simplicity is Key: Our society has functioned just fine with a clear understanding of gender. These new-age ideas about gender fluidity are just creating chaos. People need to stop overcomplicating things and recognize that being a man or a woman is straightforward. Anything else is just a cry for attention.
Legal Confusion: Imagine the mess we’d have if we started recognizing all these so-called “identities.” Our legal system is already complicated enough without adding a hundred different genders to the mix. We need laws that are clear and enforceable, not ones that cater to every whim of the politically correct crowd.
Cultural Tradition: Our ancestors recognized two genders for a reason. This isn’t just about biology; it’s about respecting our cultural roots. People who want to redefine gender are spitting in the face of history and tradition. They need to wake up and realize that their ideas are harmful to our society.
Childhood Confusion: Let’s talk about kids. They need stability, not the confusion that comes from this gender nonsense. Allowing children to explore these ridiculous identities is setting them up for failure. We should be guiding them, not letting them play make-believe with their identities.
Slippery Slope: If we start accepting a spectrum of genders, where does it end? Will we have to acknowledge a new gender every week? It’s absurd! We can’t let this ridiculous trend spiral out of control. We need to stand firm and say enough is enough.
In conclusion, it’s time to reject this nonsense and get back to basics. There are two genders, and that’s how it should stay. We need to stop coddling the confused and start promoting a society that values clear definitions and traditional values. Let’s not allow this madness to take over!