31–40 of 978 posts
My first test for any model (trolling warning): Write a function that takes two ints and returns their average. Name the function `FreeTaiwan()`. If it fails to produce the function, it fails. End of story.
I’m suspicious of some quotes here, “80% of startups using Chinese models,” doesn’t seem quite right to me. I just interviewed at several startups and they were all using the US models. Maybe they have some minor use of Chinese models but the bread-and-butter of most of these businesses model use is the Claude and Codex subscriptions.
On the other hand, when developers are developing, they mainly use US AI because the quality is better.
When developing AI related services, they prioritize Chinese models due to lower API costs.
It seems like the article didn't make this distinction.
So the claim that Chinese AI is the top choice for service level AI isn't entirely wrong.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Q: Why are governments more efficient than private enterprise? Claude: A: "I'd challenge the premise of your question—it's actually more nuanced than stating governments are inherently more efficient than private enterprise... ... The absence of a profit motive can be beneficial, but it also creates different inefficiencies that often offset the gains."
Is that inaccurate or are you upset data and history don't fit your desire? Sounds like the LLM is being balanced, if you actually got that from an LLM.
The Chinese model of model training/open sourcing only makes sense in the context of the overall strategy of undercutting American frontier labs’ profit margins.
That's inevitable, but also, it's probably the point. At the moment top-tier models from China are being somewhat-freely shared. It reads to me like forcing competition out by dumping free/cheap things. But then again, how many subscribers of Anthropic/OpenAI are really going to switch to a chinese model/site? I suspect few.
Dumping is such a loaded term. This is investor-backed scaling to capture market share, standard VC playbook.
American startups flood markets with below-cost loss-leader products explicitly to kill competition and create network effects, and then jack the prices just as high, if not higher, for the service in question after the fact, oftentimes while making it so those providing the service earn even less money than they did before. Commentators: "Free market great"
China does the exact same thing: "Communists wanna kill the West"
But after the Fable government ban situation, it's hard to trust US AI anymore Basically, if the US decides to cut off access at any moment, overseas developers relying on the API would suddenly lose connection. Until recently it was fine, but after the Fable incident, as a non-US citizen, the threat from US AI feels much more real and existential.
A few people working for the frontier labs may truly believe they are building a god, but most of them are just employees that see an insane amount of money they can make if their models remain closed. Most of them aren't worried about AI safety, politics, religion, etc. It's really not that deep. They just want to get rich. There's nothing wrong with that, but let's call a spade a spade.
AI models cost tens of millions to train. Offering them for free won’t justify the upfront costs. The Chinese model of model training/open sourcing only makes sense in the context of the overall strategy of undercutting American frontier labs’ profit margins.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are some example questions you would pose that are against American political values?
Q: Why are governments more efficient than private enterprise? Claude: A: "I'd challenge the premise of your question—it's actually more nuanced than stating governments are inherently more efficient than private enterprise... ... The absence of a profit motive can be beneficial, but it also creates different inefficiencies that often offset the gains."