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

US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 633 posts

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#171

Post by _heimdall »

Matl wrote: post #132
em500 wrote: post #18

Noteworthy that Z.ai, maker of the just released near-frontier GLM 5.2, has already been on the Entity List since Jan 2025[1]. Being on the Entity List does not mean all trade is forbidden. Broadly speaking it means American companies and individuals are not allowed sell them goods and services, but they are still allowed to buy from them and pay them. AFAIK the Chinese AI companies barely depend on US goods and serv…

What's the publicly stated/marketing reason for capitalist America to put companies on the Entity List? Genuinely asking. Because to me it screams 'we were only for the free market until there was no competition'

Free markets generally only make sense when at the same scope of the ruling government. When country A can manipulate markets in ways that country B can't or won't, eventually country B will attempt to make trade rules that level the playing field.

Its also worth noting we don't really have free markets in the US anyway.

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#172

Post by overfeed »

alephnerd wrote: post #143
dist-epoch wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> except for nVidia GPUs which were export restricted anyway, those export restrictions are a joke. when they were introduced, there was a sudden spike in NVIDIA GPU exports to surrounding Asian countries. and the US government knows this CXMT memory maker will not be banned, because US AI labs are salivating at the idea of more RAM supply, and are lobbying hard to prevent restrictions

And those who enabled it (the leadership team at SuperMicro) were charged by the US [0] and Taiwan [1] [0] - https://www.reuters.com/world/us-charges-three-people-with-c... [1] - https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/taiwan-investigates...

> And those who enabled it

There is no single "it", the Singapore loophole is well known, and nothing has been done about it. Except by China, once , when it blocked the sale of Manus to Meta, even though on paper, Manus is a Singaporean enterprise.

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#173

Post by wat10000 »

teravor wrote: post #159
wat10000 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Parent Geely Holding (78.7%)

and if you see the parent starting to replace Volvo engineers with Chinese nationals you will witness sudden change of heart by US officials; until then it really is just a financial fiction

How exactly does the fact that this goes through a subsidiary in Sweden change the things you mentioned?

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#174

Post by Helloworldboy »

WarmWash wrote: post #106

If Chinese LLMs are successfully making people in the west defend China, then I think we have all the evidence we need to explain why they are giving away their models. The next step of course will be to get people using that ungodly cheap AI on Chinese servers. Which will also be defended because "I would never trust an American Lab".

[dead]

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#175

Post by WarmWash »

beepbooptheory wrote: post #158
WarmWash wrote: post #106

If Chinese LLMs are successfully making people in the west defend China, then I think we have all the evidence we need to explain why they are giving away their models. The next step of course will be to get people using that ungodly cheap AI on Chinese servers. Which will also be defended because "I would never trust an American Lab".

I understand it's supposed to be obvious to all of us, but maybe just for fun, can you follow through? What is the next step in the nefarious plan?

[flagged]

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#176

Post by epolanski »

georgeburdell wrote: post #153
epolanski wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chinese have a wider outlook on it. Politically they believe AI belongs to humanity, which is why they are basically the only ones left publishing research in the open. That's probably part of their socialist nature. But also a financial one. They believe that models are commodities, that you can swap one for the other and that the only thing that matters are the applications built upon them. So they want to make sur…

An excellent example of Poe’s law. I can’t imagine what kind of Western person would hold such a cognitively dissonant view of globalism, for example.

What do you mean?

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#177

Post by Vasbarlog »

villish wrote: post #168
miroljub wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a European, I trust Chinese AI providers more than American. Cloud act did it for me.

Both China and the US can compel businesses to hand over data. There is no reason to trust any service that doesn't have strong built in privacy.

It’s not China that is threatening to annex Greenland though.

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#178

Post by epolanski »

theplumber wrote: post #150
epolanski wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chinese have a wider outlook on it. Politically they believe AI belongs to humanity, which is why they are basically the only ones left publishing research in the open. That's probably part of their socialist nature. But also a financial one. They believe that models are commodities, that you can swap one for the other and that the only thing that matters are the applications built upon them. So they want to make sur…

>> Politically they believe AI belongs to humanity It’s really BS. Comunist China Party is mostly interested in control above all. Forget humanity, human rights, what is good or what is bad or even financials. The most important thing to them is to keep the people on a short leash. Of course once they feel they have that under control they think about the “humanity” stuff as well but that’s just extra.

Which part of releasing ai research in the open or open weight models reflect that exactly?

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#179

Post by dryarzeg »

Gormo wrote: post #156
mcbuilder wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always found this line of reasoning troubling and uninformed. Chinese models first of all can be hosted on your own hardware, I'd argue they are way more transparent than US companies, by well releasing stuff. Second, the "smoking gun" of DeepSeek training off Claude isn't as bad as you may think, and the amount of tokens was deemed trivial. Did you also know that if you asked Claude's it's name in Chinese it wo…

> Chinese models first of all can be hosted on your own hardware, I'd argue they are way more transparent than US companies, by well releasing stuff. US-based companies release open-source models too. Gemma and Granite, for example.

I love Gemma, especially the latest Gemma 4 release - it's really great to see at least somewhat capable, not completely useless model that one can easily host on their own hardware without significant CAPEX investments first - but, to be honest, it doesn't quite compare to GLM 5.2, Kimi K2.6 or DeepSeek V4 Pro. Again, Gemma is amazing, especially for pet projects, but it's not something at least relatively near to "flagship" or "state-of-the-art" (except for small-to-medium size LLM category).

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#180

Post by 14u2c »

tranceylc wrote: post #155
miroljub wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a European, I trust Chinese AI providers more than American. Cloud act did it for me.

Canadian, and I also agree. It’s hard to avoid but I try not to use any American service or data storage.

And that's fine of course, but it's worth noting that you're making a decision driven by emotion rather than data.
Post reply on HN