b .. unumkm jjjjjjj+hn.m
Notes on DeepSeek
121–130 of 157 posts
Re: Notes on DeepSeek
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, they learnt this from the US, who subsidized Uber for _14 years_, Amazon for 9 years and Youtube for many years until they had destroyed global competition and made everyone dependent on them. This is now happening again with Anthropic and OpenAI, of course. China's subsidies are comparatively much shorter.
YouTube has never seriously had competition and AliBaba has been around almost as long as Amazon.
> YouTube has never seriously had competition
While saying this did you not consider that subsidized Chinese companies would claim the exact same, with at least the same amount of legitimacy? The whole idea of monopolization is that it becomes impossible for competition to arise.
You also forgot to mention Uber which has had numerous competitors, both on the taxi front as well as food delivery.
> AliBaba has been around almost as long as Amazon.
No idea why it matters how long a company has existed. There are hundreds of thousands of companies that have been around for 2-3 decades.
Re: Notes on DeepSeek
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't get the part of "AI models are not regulated directly, the government instead has restrictions on how those models can be used in software, services". Is it not the same thing? When I chat with DeepSeek about any (Chinese) political/social issue, it immediately begins aligning with the party's line or just cut off the conversation abruptly.
Very similar to why the New York Times publishes a narrow set of opinions. The government doesn’t have to ask NYT to restrict opinions. It’s just that a series of forces have come together such that one does not become an editor at NYT if they’re a militant vegan pacifist. You have to have a certain set of moderate opinions to get in the door. That’s how propaganda works in free societies and in those where the gover…
Chomsky is the NYT opinion section of academics. Where it matters, he's smoothly aligned with the rich and powerful. Where it doesn't matter, he's allowed to be a polemicist.
Re: Notes on DeepSeek
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very similar to why the New York Times publishes a narrow set of opinions. The government doesn’t have to ask NYT to restrict opinions. It’s just that a series of forces have come together such that one does not become an editor at NYT if they’re a militant vegan pacifist. You have to have a certain set of moderate opinions to get in the door. That’s how propaganda works in free societies and in those where the gover…
Chomsky is the NYT opinion section of academics. Where it matters, he's smoothly aligned with the rich and powerful. Where it doesn't matter, he's allowed to be a polemicist.
> he's smoothly aligned with the rich and powerful
especially when it comes to tourism
Re: Notes on DeepSeek
#125I can't recall the scientist's name, but he said months ago that DeepSeek is best for Physics (maybe it was on The Diary of a CEO podcast). So I had a long chat about the Simulation Hypothesis, and I was really surprised by how good, deep, and straight to the point it was. What's brutal is that Google, which started this AI revolution, has literally the worst coding model! I tried 3.5 Flash last week (the stupid stil…
steve hsu?
Re: Notes on DeepSeek
#126I can't recall the scientist's name, but he said months ago that DeepSeek is best for Physics (maybe it was on The Diary of a CEO podcast). So I had a long chat about the Simulation Hypothesis, and I was really surprised by how good, deep, and straight to the point it was. What's brutal is that Google, which started this AI revolution, has literally the worst coding model! I tried 3.5 Flash last week (the stupid stil…
steve hsu?
> steve hsu?
Actually, just searched my history, and it was Alexander Unzicker [0], actually.
Re: Notes on DeepSeek
#127Is this a link or post or what?
Re: Notes on DeepSeek
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because they are subsidized by the Chinese government. This is literally a tactic to destroy global competition. It's a smart move to make everyone dependent on them.
1. this seems to be based on misconceptions about how the chinese economy works 2. why haven't they done it yet? is the implication that they will wait until they're dominant in some x number of industries worldwide and then... raise prices? p.s. how would such "subsidization" work on a such a scale? if you think the EVs, PV panels, etc are cheap because the govt like, just covers the loss on every sale(?) where do t…
Re: Notes on DeepSeek
#129I can't recall the scientist's name, but he said months ago that DeepSeek is best for Physics (maybe it was on The Diary of a CEO podcast). So I had a long chat about the Simulation Hypothesis, and I was really surprised by how good, deep, and straight to the point it was. What's brutal is that Google, which started this AI revolution, has literally the worst coding model! I tried 3.5 Flash last week (the stupid stil…
Yeah Fable 5 is good but feels incremental and overhyped, also burned through my entire Cursor allowance in my Ultra plan in a single day. Ridiculous. They just want to create FOMO and appear mysterious so companies and users will feel so special for being allowed to use this model and pony up more money. After all they have to grow a few order of magnitude to pump their IPO valuation as much as possible, so I think this is just a strategy to justify their increased token pricing which starts to become absolutely insane. 10-20k per month per developer, do companies really think that's a good way to spend their IT budget? I assume 99 % of software shops wrtite run-of-the-mill web/mobile/desktop apps or some legacy backend APIs and CRUD code, you don't need a superintelligence to crank that stuff out. It sounds so ridiculous to have a model that supposedly can design biological weapons and then 99 % of users vibe code spaghetti Javascript with it. But the spice must flow!
Re: Notes on DeepSeek
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
> kids were pushed to use AI for homework, now it is disallowed and frowned upon. In short mixed messaging. in the early 2000s in california universities you'd get marked down for citing wikipedia. so the good souls told everyone "see the number in brackets[2] after what you're trying to cite the article for? just click that then click the archive.org or whatever link there, then cite that ." Now? i think wiki is con…
It's not that it's unreliable, it's just lazy research. Wikipedia, like all encyclopedias, is a tertiary source, but ideally your essay should be a mix of primary and secondary sources, while Wikipedia discourages original research and prefers only secondary sources. Wikipedia itself recommends against citing it as research[0] for this reason. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_Wikipedia
Wikipedia and text bots are unreliable sources for the exact same reason---they are anonymous. The point of a citation is stating that "I know this because X told me". The validity of that argument entirely depends on the authority and reputational harm X would suffer for being wrong.