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

291–300 of 633 posts

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

#291

Post by hereme888 »

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'

DeepSeek rose to fame through stolen IP from U.S., and created shell companies to bypass U.S. law. Typical CCP-inspired behavior. The free world needs protection from abusers.

I'm sure there's a ton of other abuses they've committed as they race to become China's preferred LLM.

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

#292

Post by sp527 »

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".

Found the late-stage OAI/Anthropic bagholder lmao

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

#293

Post by hereme888 »

theplumber wrote: post #133
l5870uoo9y wrote: post #103

Is DeepSeek really behaving different than other Chinese companies? Intellectual theft is ongoing and has been ongoing for decades. Besides security risks and foul play, it is impressive by just how much DeepSeek undercuts OpenAI and Claude. DeepSeek charges $0.87 per million output tokens compared to $50 for Fable and $30 for GPT-5.5.

Can you keep a straight face when you say IP theft while OpenAI and Claude have their entire business based on IP theft?

I believe OP is talking at the national wealth and technology level: China stole from the U.S. (again). So the U.S. moves to protect American companies.

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

#294

Post by sp527 »

cedarseagull wrote: post #228
beepbooptheory wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Not OP, but IMO the Chinese are waging economic warfare by "commodifying the competition". US VC's and equity are massively invested in AI being very very profitable and as soon as it's not that becomes garbage debt on a balance sheet, and a lot of it. When money is invested it's expected to make a return. When a few people make bad investments they lose their bag, when many many people all make the same bad investme…

That sounds like a problem for the idiots invested in this garbage and who cut foolish sweetheart debt deals with the hyper-scalers. That's mostly rich people, because they haven't yet found a way to offload their bags onto retail (though they're certainly trying).

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

#295

Post by jay_kyburz »

dryarzeg wrote: post #148
WarmWash wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The chinese providers are just the CCP. They don't even need a cloud act...

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.

I was reading the threads about local AI closely yesterday. Some people seem happy with it.

If I had the cash, I'd spend 6-10k on a strix halo with 128 GB and run it local with no internet connection. I think the Framework desktop is sold out but there were others seem to be still available.

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

#296

Post by janalsncm »

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 Market vs. planned economy was always mostly talking points, not a consistent ideology imo.

Even during the Cold War, American farms were heavily subsidized. The abundant supermarkets were not a product of free markets, they were a propaganda piece.

Today the US is pretty far from being a free market. Tax deductions are subsidies. Industry subsidies fund things on the front end, and bailouts are essentially subsidies after the fact.

And on top of that there are plenty of (good and bad) regulations which distort the market. For example it is illegal to import foreign insulin even if it would be cheaper. In most parts of US metro areas it is illegal to build multifamily housing.

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

#297

Post by hereme888 »

jmyeet wrote: post #12

The US government exists to defend capital interests. It's why we can't buy BYD cars. It's why we can't import any cars unless they're 25 years old. It's why a Tiktok sale was forced. It's why the US is seeking to block states from banning prediction markets. It's why the federal government is seeking to block states from blocking data center projects. As soon as DeepSeek came out I realized what was going on: China…

Those data centers that "states" want to block: the CCP was directly tied to funding the protests and movements to weaken the U.S. technologically. Kevin O'Leary exposed it, in collaboration with the White House.

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

#298

Post by Giefo6ah »

skippyboxedhero wrote: post #270
villish wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Compel? I am confused, all data in China is held in datacentres which the state has full access to, that is the terms of their operation and why some big tech US companies didn't want to operate in China. They don't need to "compel" anyone, the CCP has people at every large company supervising employees, and they already have full access to your data. I am always completely baffled by these comments that not only get…

What would be the practical difference between an order from a party cadre in a private firm and a national security letter?

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

#299

Post by kyboren »

bashtoni wrote: post #213
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 think the next step is for China to start selling Huawei (and other) GPUs around the world, because everyone appreciates the risk of giving either of the two superpowers their data. The US is no longer in a position to pressure other countries to bad imports from Chinese companies. This is the beginning end of the hyperscaler era, not a shift from US hyperscalers to Chinese hyperscalers. Taking Nvidia's extremely l…

Software ecosystem aside, their hardware is inferior to NVDA/TSMC's and will remain so. And even if it wasn't, China just doesn't have the fab capacity to both meet domestic demand and export enough to hurt demand for NVDA.

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

#300

Post by roenxi »

hereme888 wrote: post #291
Matl wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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'

DeepSeek rose to fame through stolen IP from U.S., and created shell companies to bypass U.S. law. Typical CCP-inspired behavior. The free world needs protection from abusers. I'm sure there's a ton of other abuses they've committed as they race to become China's preferred LLM.

The US should consider legalising some of this stuff, if I look at a leaderboard something like the top-10 models are built by companies facing serious accusations of copyright infringement. I assume the Europeans are obeying the law or whatever which is why they've so far only achieved peak-2024 performance or whatever and are making no particular contribution to the cutting edge, unlike the Americans and the Asians.

Come again how these laws are promoting useful results? They seem to be economically crippling. The free world should consider embracing freedom from these laws as it seems that will bring greater prosperity.

Post reply on HN