OpenAI says it has evidence DeepSeek used its model to train competitor
201–210 of 1001 posts
Re: OpenAI says it has evidence DeepSeek used its model to train competitor
#202Re: OpenAI says it has evidence DeepSeek used its model to train competitor
#203What I find the most comical about this is that the whole situation could be loosely summarized as "OpenAI is losing its job to AI."
OpenAI should be excited that it has been freed of the tedious tasks of building AI and now they can focus on higher level and more creative things.
But that's what OpenAI's costumers were supposed to do.
Re: OpenAI says it has evidence DeepSeek used its model to train competitor
#204Earlier quoted context omitted.
also, China doing in IP what it's better at and way more experienced than USA - stealing.
This kind of blithe commentary is 20 years out of date and reminiscent of 1970s criticisms of the Japanese car industry.
https://youtu.be/NUhrF0xkhhc?si=1WHWYZrhRmfOYO_y&t=1150 (it's about 2 minutes)
Re: OpenAI says it has evidence DeepSeek used its model to train competitor
#205The US government likely will favor a large strategic company like OpenAI instead of individual's copyrights, so while ironic, the US government definitely doesn't care. And the US government is also likely itching to reduce the power of Chinese AI companies that could out compete US rivals (similar to the treatment of BYD, TikTok, solar panel manufacturers, network equipment manufacturers, etc), so expect sweeping l…
>The US government likely will favor a large strategic company like OpenAI instead of individual's copyrights Even if we assume this is true, Disney and Netflix are both currently worth more than OpenAI and both rely on the strict enforcement of US copyright law. I do not think it is so obvious which powers that be have the better lobbying efforts and, currently, it's looking like this question will mostly be adjudic…
So I think OpenAI, Disney and Netflix win together. Big companies tend to win.
Re: OpenAI says it has evidence DeepSeek used its model to train competitor
#206This is absolutely hilarious! :) ClosedAI scraped human content without asking and they explained why this was acceptable... but when the outputs of their training corpus is scraped, it is THEIR dataset and this is NOT acceptable! Oh, the irony! :D I shared a few screenshots of DeepSeek answering using ChatGPT's output in yesterday's article! https://semking.com/deepseek-china-ai-model-breakthrough-sec...
The picture at the end showing deepseek's privacy policy and being concerned that it's "a security risk" is hilarious[1]. Basically every B2C company collects this sort of information[2], and is far less intrusive than what social networks collect[3]. But because it's Chinese and at the risk of overtaking Western companies, people are suddenly worried about device information and IP addresses? [1] https://semking.com…
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/organic-growth_deepseek-the-o...
I welcome friction, so I'll be blunt: I disagree with you, not because what you are saying is wrong but because you only consider systematic data collection.
That's not the issue here.
There's a difference between democracies like the United States or European countries, no matter how IMPERFECT they are, and a dictatorship that does not allow dissenting opinions.
There's a difference in how the data collected will be used.
Freedom of speech, even when it is relative, is better than totalitarianism.
Re: OpenAI says it has evidence DeepSeek used its model to train competitor
#207Earlier quoted context omitted.
While all of this is true, that DeepSeek wouldn't be here were it not for the research that preceded it notably Google's paper, then Llama, and ChatGPT which they're modeled after, its release still did something profound to their psyche, the motivation and self-actualization this instills to the Chinese. They witnessed the power of their accomplishments: a side-hustle project knocked off an easy trillion. This is on…
Yes, and what does preceding research do? Get followed by more research building on it.
Re: OpenAI says it has evidence DeepSeek used its model to train competitor
#208This is absolutely hilarious! :) ClosedAI scraped human content without asking and they explained why this was acceptable... but when the outputs of their training corpus is scraped, it is THEIR dataset and this is NOT acceptable! Oh, the irony! :D I shared a few screenshots of DeepSeek answering using ChatGPT's output in yesterday's article! https://semking.com/deepseek-china-ai-model-breakthrough-sec...
[flagged]
Society will always have crazy sociopaths destroying things for their own gain, and now is Altman's turn.
Re: OpenAI says it has evidence DeepSeek used its model to train competitor
#209This is absolutely hilarious! :) ClosedAI scraped human content without asking and they explained why this was acceptable... but when the outputs of their training corpus is scraped, it is THEIR dataset and this is NOT acceptable! Oh, the irony! :D I shared a few screenshots of DeepSeek answering using ChatGPT's output in yesterday's article! https://semking.com/deepseek-china-ai-model-breakthrough-sec...
US AI folk were leading for two years by just throwing more and more compute at the same thing that Google threw them like a bone years ago (namely transformers). They made next to no innovation in any area other than how to connect more compute together. The idea of additional inference time compute, looping the network back on its own outputs, which is the only significant conceptual advancement of last years was something I, as a layman, came up with after few days of thinking why AI sucks and what can be done to make it able to tackle problems that require iterative reasoning. They announced it few weeks after I came up with the idea, so it was in the works for some time, but it shows you how basic idea it was. There was nothing else.
Suddenly when there comes a small company that introduced few actual algorithmic advancements which resulted in 100x optimization which is something expected with algorithmic optimizations, the big AI suddenly went into full "dog ate my homework" mode. Blaming everyone and everything around.
Let's not mention the fact that if full outputs of their models could enable them to train a better model at 1% cost then it puts them in even worse light that they didn't do it.