871–880 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's a note about running entirely on Huawei chips: https://finance.yahoo.com/sectors/technology/articles/deepse...
Did you read any part of the link you posted? Huawei is mentioned once and not in the context of the model being trained or currently running on Huawei chips.
The incredible arrogance and hybris of the American initiated tech war - it is just a beautiful thing to see it slowly fall apart. The US-China contest aside - it is in the application layer llms will show their value. There the field, with llm commoditization and no clear monopolies, is wide open. There was a point in time where it looked like llms would the domain of a single well guarded monopoly - that would have…
For me as a consumer, competition is good - that means companies have less leverage over me, which is beneficial even if I decided to never use a Chinese model ever.
Something is odd with this model, their blog posts shows REALLY good results, but in most other third-party benchmarks, people realize it's not really SOTA, even bellow Kimi K2.6 and GLM-5/5.1 In my tests too[0], it doesn't reach top 10. One issue, which they also mentioned in their post, is that they can't really serve well the model at the moment, so V4-Pro is heavily rate-limited and gives a lot of timeout errors…
> V4-Pro is heavily rate-limited and gives a lot of timeout errors when I try to test it. This shouldn't be an issue though, considering the model is open-source Why does it matter if the model/architecture/weights are open source or not, given it's their proprietary inference hardware they're currently having issues with? Proprietary or not, the same issue would still be there on their platform.
If the conclusion is: "DeepSeek v4 is this good, if you use it from DeepSeek" (which is how most people would use it anyway), then it makes sense to count API errors as failures.
But, if the conclusion must be "The DeepSeek v4 model is this good when self-hosted and ran at ideal conditions", then the model should be tested locally, and skipping all invalid calls.
I am still debating what should I do in this case, because showing a model as #1, and then people try to use it from their official provider and it fails half of the time, then that's also not a good leaderboard.
I am considering adding a "reliability" column. Retry API errors until the test completes, BUT track how many retries was needed and compute a separate reliability score. But here comes a different problem: reliability varies over time and providers, so that's tougher to test.
Open Source as it gets in this space, top notch developer documentation, and prices insanely low, while delivering frontier model capabilities. So basically, this is from hackers to hackers. Loving it! Also, note that there's zero CUDA dependency. It runs entirely on Huawei chips. In other words, Chinese ecosystem has delivered a complete AI stack. Like it or not, that's a big news. But what's there not to like when…
> Also, note that there's zero CUDA dependency. It runs entirely on Huawei chips. That is a huge claim to make with no evidence. I researched what you said, and I have found no statement to that effect in their paper[0], on huggingface[1], twitter[2], WeChat[3], or in their news release[4]. They only mention as a footnote in only the Chinese version of their news release that they plan to reduce inference costs with…
With DS tech though the worry is generally more capacity. Haven't seen issues with v4 but in the past their combination of quality and pricing means they get overloaded.
Open Source as it gets in this space, top notch developer documentation, and prices insanely low, while delivering frontier model capabilities. So basically, this is from hackers to hackers. Loving it! Also, note that there's zero CUDA dependency. It runs entirely on Huawei chips. In other words, Chinese ecosystem has delivered a complete AI stack. Like it or not, that's a big news. But what's there not to like when…
> Also, note that there's zero CUDA dependency. It runs entirely on Huawei chips. That is a huge claim to make with no evidence. I researched what you said, and I have found no statement to that effect in their paper[0], on huggingface[1], twitter[2], WeChat[3], or in their news release[4]. They only mention as a footnote in only the Chinese version of their news release that they plan to reduce inference costs with…
Open Source as it gets in this space, top notch developer documentation, and prices insanely low, while delivering frontier model capabilities. So basically, this is from hackers to hackers. Loving it! Also, note that there's zero CUDA dependency. It runs entirely on Huawei chips. In other words, Chinese ecosystem has delivered a complete AI stack. Like it or not, that's a big news. But what's there not to like when…
> Also, note that there's zero CUDA dependency. It runs entirely on Huawei chips. That is a huge claim to make with no evidence. I researched what you said, and I have found no statement to that effect in their paper[0], on huggingface[1], twitter[2], WeChat[3], or in their news release[4]. They only mention as a footnote in only the Chinese version of their news release that they plan to reduce inference costs with…
DeepSeek’s next AI model delayed by attempt to use Chinese chips
https://www.ft.com/content/eb984646-6320-4bfe-a78d-a1da2274b...
Quite jarring to see how many people think the Chinese authoritarian regime, and the tech that it allows to be created in that country, are going to be "safer" or whatever than US tech. It's trendy to say the US govt is now authorization, but that's just pure naïve groupthink.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The funniest thing is how Americans have been fooled with this stuff. This version of AI is mostly taking a public paper from 2017, investing in GPUs, and feeding it as much data as possible. So with a few computer scientists, no respect for intellectual property, and tons of money to burn, you have all the ingredients to create this technology. Sam Altman and friends did it, as did the Chinese. The difference is tha…
The response from US corporations has been banning Chinese models claiming they’re spying or something.