Live data from Hacker News

Open-R1: an open reproduction of DeepSeek-R1

huggingface.co

81–90 of 246 posts

Re: Open-R1: an open reproduction of DeepSeek-R1

#81
post #72
post #10

Is this what the Web was like in the beginning? Something exciting and fascinating every week?

No. My memory of the advent of the WWW was a sidebar in PC Magazine in Nov 1993 with an FTP link to download the NCSA Mosaic browser. It was a wow! moment to visit the few sites that existed. But nothing like this. What we’re seeing now is generating vastly more interest and excitement. It’s more akin to the 1999 dotcom bubble, but with far more impact and reach.

>far more impact and reach.

Absurd, AI has had zero impact in the everyday life of most of the population of Earth, in fact the biggest impact has been upon the wallets of speculators

Re: Open-R1: an open reproduction of DeepSeek-R1

#82
post #77
post #10

Is this what the Web was like in the beginning? Something exciting and fascinating every week?

the web was fascinating every second. You could click on a link without having ANY idea what you would land on. The overall quality was very poor, but it was thrilling. A bit like indie cinema.

My first search: cocktails

Re: Open-R1: an open reproduction of DeepSeek-R1

#83
post #10

Is this what the Web was like in the beginning? Something exciting and fascinating every week?

The last time I was really excited by tech was in the 90s, when game graphics improved spectacularly over a period of a few years, from Wolfenstein in 1992 to Half-Life in 1998.

Along the way people invented the 3D GPU: https://fabiensanglard.net/3dfx_sst1/

But AI? To me, AI means the replacement of the human internet with doppelgangers eroding the possibility of human connection.

Re: Open-R1: an open reproduction of DeepSeek-R1

#84
post #9

Exciting to see this being reproduced, loving the hyper-fast movement in open source! This is exactly why it is not “US vs China”, the battle is between heavily-capitalized Silicon Valley companies versus open source. Every believer in this tech owes DeepSeek some gratitude, but even they stand on shoulders of giants in the form of everyone else who pushed the frontier forward and chose to publish, rather than exploi…

Oh yes, I am firmly on Team China here because US companies got too greedy. Meta is an exception here though and they also propelled AI development massively. DeepSeek is awesome. Any AI task yet implemented in our business can be run from my local PC with just the smaller models. And my PC is fairly crappy to begin with. OpenAI looks quite silly with their "we have to close everything".

I'm on team open source. To me the exciting thing was ollama downloading the 7B and running it on a 5yo cheap lonovo and getting a token rate similar to the first release of ChatGPT.

Running local on CPU opens so much possibilities for smart and privacy focused home devices that serve you.

In my test it hallucinated confidently but my interest is in simple second brain like rag. "Hey thingy, what is my schedule today?"

Need it to be a bit faster though as the thinking part adds a lot of latency.

Re: Open-R1: an open reproduction of DeepSeek-R1

#85
post #10

Is this what the Web was like in the beginning? Something exciting and fascinating every week?

Every now and then we still experience the power of collaborative work fueled by open source and not driven by money but curiosity and collegiality. This is the thing I miss the most from the early internet years.

[deleted]

Re: Open-R1: an open reproduction of DeepSeek-R1

#86
post #52

Exciting to see this being reproduced, loving the hyper-fast movement in open source! This is exactly why it is not “US vs China”, the battle is between heavily-capitalized Silicon Valley companies versus open source. Every believer in this tech owes DeepSeek some gratitude, but even they stand on shoulders of giants in the form of everyone else who pushed the frontier forward and chose to publish, rather than exploi…

Open source has pragmatic merits and I love the culture. But I don't like associating it with a moral high ground because it doesn't charge you money. By this standard, we should also ask Intel/AMD to open-source their CPUs, video game studios to open-source their code and artifacts, and Google/Amazon for their search engine and infrastructure. Not all business sectors can afford to sustain with the Open Source model…

The freedom is mostly not about the money. The 3D model Benchy was free, while being not free as people found out. Luckily the copyright owners treated it like people were free and free for now... but that could change.

Re: Open-R1: an open reproduction of DeepSeek-R1

#87
post #73
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Open source has pragmatic merits and I love the culture. But I don't like associating it with a moral high ground because it doesn't charge you money. By this standard, we should also ask Intel/AMD to open-source their CPUs, video game studios to open-source their code and artifacts, and Google/Amazon for their search engine and infrastructure. Not all business sectors can afford to sustain with the Open Source model…

> By this standard, we should also ask Intel/AMD to open-source their CPUs, video game studios to open-source their code and artifacts, and Google/Amazon for their search engine and infrastructure. You aren't? You're weird.

Yeah. Actually if those companies did I suspect it wouldn't hurt them one iota.

Re: Open-R1: an open reproduction of DeepSeek-R1

#89
post #6

What are some other domains outside of Math and Coding that would be suitable for RL with automated verification?

These LLMs are already very helpful when studying scientific fields. If you're reading a scientific paper and come across an equation you don't know how to derive, LLMs can often correctly derive it from first principles. It's not 100% reliable, but when it works, it's incredibly helpful.

Re: Open-R1: an open reproduction of DeepSeek-R1

#90
post #20
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the timescales were larger

Much larger. Static HTML AJAX WebSocket, for example weren't it decades in between?

It's important to understand that we had "AJAX" before we had AJAX, if you see what I mean.

I was part of a team that deployed an e-commerce site that made international news in 1998, that used AJAX-type techniques in a way that worked in IE3 on Windows 3.11. (Though this was not part of the media fuss at the time; that was more about the fact of being able to pay for things online, still)

The arrival of XMLHTTPRequest made it possible to do everything with core technology, but it was already possible to do asynchronous work in JS by making use of a hidden frame.

You could direct that frame to load a document, the result of which would be only a tag containing a JS variable definition, and the last thing that document would do is call a function in the parent frame to hand over its data. Bingo: asynchronous JS (that looked essentially exactly like JSON).

Since there were also various hacky ways in each browser to force a browser to reload page from cache (that we exhaustively tested), and you could do document.write(), it was possible to trigger a page to regenerate from asynchronous dynamic data in a data store in the parent frame, using a purely static page to contain it.

In this way we really radically cut down the server footprint needed for a national rollout, because our site was almost entirely static, and we were also able to secure with HTTPS all of the functions that actually exchanged customer data, without enduring the then 15-25% CPU overhead of SSL at either end (this is before Intel CPUs routinely had the instruction sets that sped up encryption). We also ended up with a site that was fast over a 33.6 modem.

This was a pretty novel idea at the time -- we were the only people doing it that we knew of -- but over the years I have found we were not the only team in the world effectively inventing this technique in parallel, a year or 18 months before XMLHTTPRequest was added to browsers.

(IE3 on Windows 3.11 was a good experience, by the way. Better behaved and more consistent than Netscape)

At around the same time we were also exploring things like using Java applets to maintain encrypted channels and taking advantage of the very limited ways one had to get data in and out of an applet. For example you couldn't push out from an applet to the page easily, but you could set up something that polled the applet and called the functions it wanted.

I don't like to get all "get off my lawn" but it feels like we actually earned our keep back then, getting technologies to do stuff that no standards working group anywhere was really considering and for which precious little documentation actually existed. There's a generation of us who held our copies of "Webmaster In A Nutshell" and "Java In A Nutshell" very close.

Post reply on HN