Earlier quoted context omitted.
When it comes to annexation, China doesn't threaten, they just invade and extinguish.
And when it comes to the US, every accusation is a confession.
It certainly wasn't a denial. China could learn a lot from that.
US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
281–290 of 633 posts
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#282Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, I am not familiar with Alipay, at least in the use case you're referring to; How do you exactly pay for 2 servers using Alipay from a CVS?
I can load US dollars I hand over to the CVS attendant and load it on my AliPay (Alibaba account). I can then pay my Alibaba server bills with Alipay.
Is there an intermediary?
The cash doesn’t go directly from CVS to AliPay, right?
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#283Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's nothing wrong with the US buying greenland, which has been done for territories around the world? The US has a long history of protecting individual freedoms, China does not. There's an irony that you're aware of the misgivings of the US because we have free speech protections. You're probably less aware of the misgivings of the EU because they regularly arrest citizens for speech, and no awareness of the iss…
>The US has a long history of protecting individual freedoms You can't be serious. Was the individual freedom of those 120 Iranian girls protected? Was the individual freedom of Renée Good protected? Alex Pretti?
The inability to conceive of a country where these things would happen and you would have no idea that it had ever happened...and, perhaps more importantly, wouldn't care that you didn't know.
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#284Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just because they did it doesn't mean more people should do it...
This doesn't at all change the irony of big AI labs complaining about Chinese startups stealing the labs' IP, essentially by scraping the responses. HN has a higher proportion of AI promoters than AI skeptics, and for a good while, the default response to complaints from book authors, bloggers, and other content creators was that "you put it on the internet so it's fair game", or "it's no different from a human learn…
> HN has a higher proportion of AI promoters than AI skeptics
You're be using a different HN than me, or you and I only pay attention to one side or the other.
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#285Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think too many people are conflating Chinese providers with Chinese models - you can easily have Chinese models safely (well, relatively safely, I guess) hosted on US or EU infrastructure.
Exactly this. For some reason this is constantly being overlooked/confused. It is very possible to deploy these models inside your own VPC on the big cloud providers and have it be completely secure. I would argue that is even more secure than trusting a model provider’s native API as your traffic is not staying inside your own controlled cloud environment.
[deleted]
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#286Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#287Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can do that without open sourcing their weights. In fact, that would be the best way to do it. So why are they open sourcing their weights?
To create goodwill! Nefariously!
The US truly can't consider foreign policy that doesn't help propagate the military industrial complex.
It's like the idea of diplomacy and collaboration are two words that do not exist.
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#288Noteworthy 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…
How does that even work? If Z.ai wants to buy lets say GPUs for AI training, what's stopping them from going to a local reseller? Its not even circumventing the rules, its the natural thing to do. For that matter, does (only) NVIDIA make datacenter cards? When I buy a gaming card, I dont buy from NVIDIA, I buy from an integrator, like Gigabyte, who work with a company like Foxconn to make the cards.
The export restrictions only apply to certain GPU models, which are the more recent powerful ones used for training tasks. So the H100, B100 etc. are banned along with 4090, 5090.
Nvidia has downgraded chips that aren’t banned. H100 is banned, H800 is allowed. A100 is banned, A800 is allowed. But the sale has a tariff attached.
That’s all how it’s supposed to work. In practice companies probably circumvent the restrictions.
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#289Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's nothing wrong with the US buying greenland, which has been done for territories around the world? The US has a long history of protecting individual freedoms, China does not. There's an irony that you're aware of the misgivings of the US because we have free speech protections. You're probably less aware of the misgivings of the EU because they regularly arrest citizens for speech, and no awareness of the iss…
How long has the history of the US protecting the individual freedoms of non-white or non-rich citizens been?
Since the late 60s there has been explicit federal legislation. I assume you meant this as a rhetorical question but there is a definite answer because the US is a transparent system. Law is passed, the courts enforce.
The fact that you are unable to answer this question about China where it is often unclear why certain people are being targeted should demonstrate how big the gap is. For example, when Xi's first corruption crackdown happened, it turned out that it was being orchestrated in part by someone in their 90s who had left front-line politics twenty years ago (and much of why that happened is unclear, we are only just learning about things that happened in Chinese politics multiple decades ago so it will be a while before we know...we do know that Xi was then able to make unilateral sweeping changes to his own role shortly after that broke every convention of the last 5 decades)...it is difficult to compare this to anything that happens in any other political system. In China, you find out someone has been executed for reasons that are obviously not explicit months after it has happened.
It is genuinely quite difficult to compare to anything else. 6 people meet in a room, they have almost all the power, and maybe you will read about what they might have said 4 decades later in a book...that will never be published in China.
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#290Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's funny how you can look at obscenely overvalued Western AI companies, with capex's that are unsustainable, and along comes a system which pokes a gaping hole in this model, and the response is "Ya, but what do those sneaky Chinese have up their sleeve here?!" Perhaps the question should instead be "Why are these Western AI companies getting insane valuations on dubious ROI, and how can these Chinese models run on…
The main cost is training the first version of model. It is very easy to just train the copy cat model based on the output of another model.
That doesn't make any sense. If the cost is training, the cost is compute, not data. Distilling another model means paying for that model, which isn't obviously less expensive than crawling the web and curating a dataset. Regardless of where your data comes from, the training process costs the same.