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

DeepSeek uses banned Nvidia chips for AI model, report says

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 331 posts

Re: DeepSeek uses banned Nvidia chips for AI model, report says

#171

Post by CamperBob2 »

palmotea wrote: post #82
CamperBob2 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Planning to do it" is one thing, but thanks to Trump's erratic and corrupt trade policy, they now have a Manhattan Project-level incentive to make it happen. It's ridiculous to think they won't succeed, just by dint of sheer numbers alone.

> "Planning to do it" is one thing, but thanks to Trump's erratic and corrupt trade policy, they now have a Manhattan Project-level incentive to make it happen. The plans weren't wishes, they were things they were actively working on to make happen. The point is they didn't need "Trump's erratic and corrupt trade policy" to motivate it, they were already motivated to do it anyway . The US's problem is that its action…

The plans weren't wishes, they were things they were actively working on to make happen. The point is they didn't need "Trump's erratic and corrupt trade policy" to motivate it, they were already motivated to do it anyway.

Yes, they were "actively working on it"; no, they had made little significant progress despite throwing tons of money at the initiative.

There were lots of stories along the lines of https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/19/technology/china-microchi... from the early 2020s, not so many lately. Their internal posture will now be the same as Russia's post-1945 push for the Bomb. Continued failure will (possibly literally) place heads at stake.

The US's problem is that its actions are uncoordinated.

They are coordinated well enough, but with the goal of magnifying Cheeto Benito's personal influence and cultivating his in-group's fortunes.

Re: DeepSeek uses banned Nvidia chips for AI model, report says

#172

Post by jyscao »

qoez wrote: post #156
ComputerGuru wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s bandits all the way down, so adding a little smuggling to that doesn’t surprise me. Implying it’s *morally* wrong for a Chinese company to bypass US sanctions is hilarious. You really say that with a straight face when even the president admits this is only protectionism?

[flagged]

Projection. China does not even try to export their ideologies to the rest of the world who they see as clearly different culturally. The “west” OTOH does not have a good track record of that.

Re: DeepSeek uses banned Nvidia chips for AI model, report says

#173

Post by higginsniggins »

qoez wrote: post #156
ComputerGuru wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It’s bandits all the way down, so adding a little smuggling to that doesn’t surprise me. Implying it’s *morally* wrong for a Chinese company to bypass US sanctions is hilarious. You really say that with a straight face when even the president admits this is only protectionism?

[flagged]

How about and.... this might be too radical for you but here me out...... no one with "dominance for humanity overall"

Re: DeepSeek uses banned Nvidia chips for AI model, report says

#174

Post by secret-noun »

jhfdbkofdchk wrote: post #72
BigTTYGothGF wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People with Chinese names do sometimes live in Delaware.

Do they all live at the same address of the overseas freight forwarder too? I've sold stuff on eBay to someone in Europe who had me ship to the same address in Delaware. I was confused so I googled the address and turned up the freight forwarding service.

This has happened to me a couple of times with eBay sales.

Is it safe to transact with people who use freight forwarders in your experience? Do you lose any protections?

Out of fear, in my cases, I cancelled the auctions.

On second thought though, I wonder if it's actually the buyer using the service that is more at risk (introduction of 3rd party, more complex delivery, probably impossible to return, etc)

Re: DeepSeek uses banned Nvidia chips for AI model, report says

#175

Post by hinkley »

sofixa wrote: post #146
hinkley wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the CIA shows up, Amazon is 100% going to let them rootkit those boxes. They might even have a way to do it without rebooting your servers.

To obtain what? Deepseek's newest open source model before they release it?

You think they’re only going to eavesdrop?

You’re mistaking them for the FBI. CIA has destabilized entire countries.

Re: DeepSeek uses banned Nvidia chips for AI model, report says

#176

Post by echelon »

hearsathought wrote: post #168
echelon wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the moral imperative of every country to optimize for its citizens' economic prospects. The CIA (and every other intelligence org.) is literally a weapon designed to operate in the grey area to fit the mandate of the policy makers and elected leadership. Many of the things they do are questionable or worse. In the case of the DoD, they do these things at the behest of democratically elected leadership. Of course…

> It's the moral imperative of every country to optimize for its citizens' economic prospects. "Moral imperative"? No country was ever created out of a moral imperative. None. Also, no country was ever created to optimize for its citizens' economic prospects. Every country was created by the elites for the benefits of the elites.

> We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The intent is there.

It's an incredibly complex distributed system with millions of actors and interactions, entrenched powers, regulatory capture, Citizens United, etc. It has to be defended and garbage collected.

Re: DeepSeek uses banned Nvidia chips for AI model, report says

#177

Post by rkagerer »

echelon wrote: post #147
rkagerer wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google and Meta are probably the only two companies that have a right to license their training data For the sake of someone unfamiliar... Why is that? Did they pay teams of monkeys to generate their own, novel training data? Or gain explicit, opt-in permission from users who entrust them with their files/content?

> For the sake of someone unfamiliar... Why is that? I edited my comment, but basically they both own massive social media properties (YouTube, Instagram, Facebook) or file upload sites (Google Drive, Google Photos, Gmail) and their ToSes grant them these rights. You accept these terms when you use their services. That's not great, but we are getting free services. It's in the terms. It's a whole lot better than just…

You accept these terms when you use their services.

I certainly didn't*. I'd love to see litigation testing just how solid those insidious opt-in-by-default schemes are as a basis for "ownership".

If they had users explicitly opt-in with a "Yes, go ahead and train on my stuff and by the way I assert that I have all the rights to grant you the same", I'd have no problem with that, and they'd have a much stronger claim.

(*Before others inevitably disagree: I do opt-out of this stuff aggressively, and further send notice to companies from time to time that I don't agree to certain objectionable clauses of their ToS and they're welcome to close my account).

Re: DeepSeek uses banned Nvidia chips for AI model, report says

#179

Post by yannyu »

echelon wrote: post #166
yannyu wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is just "might makes right" but modern. I don't know that this is the consistent, wide-held belief that you seem to think it is. Plenty of people would rather our governments not engage in clandestine disruption and undermining of foreign governments. Competition is inevitable, especially between geopolitical rivals, but we don't have to engage in Minitrue-style "the enemy has always been our enemy" rhetoric.

We live under economic conditions created by a government that does intervene. And a greater world order established by a hegemon that does intervene. It would be interesting to see what life would be like today had that not happened. It might be better, it might be worse. Probably a little of both for different groups of people. As the world returns to multi-polarity, there are signs of increases in violence. The la…

> The last time the world had multi-polarity, we had far more wars. Including the worst wars the world has ever seen.

Citations? Simply saying that World War 1 happened during a time of multi-polarity is just begging the question. Multi-polarity of varying degrees has always been the case throughout human history, and often times single-polarity is achieved only through extreme violence.

Post reply on HN