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

NIST's DeepSeek "evaluation" is a hit piece

erichartford.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 251 posts

Re: NIST's DeepSeek "evaluation" is a hit piece

#51

Post by grafmax »

Hizonner wrote: post #42
dns_snek wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like generating vulnerable code given a specific prompt/context. I also don't think it's just China, the US will absolutely order American providers to do the same. It's a perfect access point for installing backdoors into foreign systems.

Up until recently, I would have reminded you that the US government (admittedly unlike the Chinese government) has no legal authority to order anybody to do anything like that. Not only that, but if it asked , it'd be well advised to ask nicely, because it also has no legal authority to demand that anybody keep such a request secret. And no, evil as it is, the "National Security Letter" power doesn't in fact cover an…

It really does seem like we’re simply supposed to root for one authoritarian government over another.

Re: NIST's DeepSeek "evaluation" is a hit piece

#52

Post by [deleted] »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #44
Bengalilol wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ask Grok to generate an image of bald Zelensky: it does execute. Ask Grok to generate an image of bald Trump: it goes on with an ocean of excuses on why the task is too hard.

I don't use Grok. Grok answers to someone with his own political biases and motives, many of which I personally disagree with. And that's OK, because nobody in the government forced him to set it up that way.

[deleted]

Re: NIST's DeepSeek "evaluation" is a hit piece

#53

Post by UltraSane »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #32
tehjoker wrote: post #11

I appreciate that DeepSeek is trained to respect "core socialist values". It's actually really helpful to engage with to ask questions about how chinese thinkers interpret their successes and failures vs other socialist projects. Obviously reading books is better, but I was surprised by how useful it was. If you ask it loaded questions the way the CIA would pose them, it censors the answer though lmao

Good faith questions are the best. I wonder why people bother with bad faith questions. Virtue signaling is my guess.

What do you consider to be bad faith questions?

Re: NIST's DeepSeek "evaluation" is a hit piece

#54

Post by whatthesimp »

Hizonner wrote: post #42
dns_snek wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like generating vulnerable code given a specific prompt/context. I also don't think it's just China, the US will absolutely order American providers to do the same. It's a perfect access point for installing backdoors into foreign systems.

Up until recently, I would have reminded you that the US government (admittedly unlike the Chinese government) has no legal authority to order anybody to do anything like that. Not only that, but if it asked , it'd be well advised to ask nicely, because it also has no legal authority to demand that anybody keep such a request secret. And no, evil as it is, the "National Security Letter" power doesn't in fact cover an…

> Up until recently, I would have reminded you that the US government (admittedly unlike the Chinese government) has no legal authority to order anybody to do anything like that.

I'm not sure how closely you've been following, but the US government has a long history of doing things they don't have legal authority to do.

Re: NIST's DeepSeek "evaluation" is a hit piece

#55

Post by wordpad »

Bengalilol wrote: post #31
tinktank wrote: post #20

I urge everyone to go read the original report and _then_ to read this analysis and make up their own mind. Step away from the clickbait, go read the original report.

Here's the report: https://www.nist.gov/system/files/documents/2025/09/30/CAISI...

TLDR for others: * DeepSeek cutting edge models are still far behind * On par DeepSeek costs 35% more to run * DeepSeek models 12 times more susceptible to jail breaking and malicious instructions * DeepSeek models follow strict censorship

I guess none of these are a big deal to non-enterprise consumers.

Re: NIST's DeepSeek "evaluation" is a hit piece

#56

Post by cowpig »

JPKab wrote: post #23

The CCP literally revoked the visas of key DeepSeek engineers. That's all we need to know.

Source?

And how is that "all we need to know"? I'm not even sure what your implication is.

Is it that some CCP officials see DeepSeek engineers as adversarial somehow? Or that they are flight risks? What does it have to do with the NIST report?

Re: NIST's DeepSeek "evaluation" is a hit piece

#58

Post by _ache_ »

falcor84 wrote: post #27
JPKab wrote: post #23

The CCP literally revoked the visas of key DeepSeek engineers. That's all we need to know.

I would like to know more

Deepseek starts out as a one-man operation. Like any company that has attracted a lot of attention, it becomes a "target" of the CCP, which then takes measures such as prohibiting key employees from leaving the country AND setting goals such as using Huawei chips instead of NVIDIA chips.

From a Chinese political perspective, this is a good move in the long term. From Deepseek's perspective, however, this is clearly NOT the case, as it causes the company to lose some (or even most?) of its competitiveness and fall behind in the race.

Re: NIST's DeepSeek "evaluation" is a hit piece

#59

Post by UltraSane »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #46
falcor84 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to know more

They revoke passports of personnel whom they deem are at risk of being negatively influenced or even kidnapped when abroad. Re influence, think school teachers. Re kidnapping, see Meng Wangzhou (Huawei CFO). There is a history of important Chinese personnel being kidnapped by e.g. the US when abroad. There is also a lot of talk in western countries about "banning Chinese [all presumed spies/propagandists/agents] from…

"There is a history of important Chinese personnel being kidnapped by e.g. the US when abroad"

No there isn't. China revoked their passport to keep them prisoners not to keep them safe.

"On a good faith basis, one would think China banning people from leaving is a good thing"

Why would anyone think imprisoning someone like this is a good thing?

Post reply on HN