Earlier quoted context omitted.
The moat is the compute.
The compute for training, or for inference?
Yes
DeepSeek pause fundraise after comments on compute gap to US leaked (transcript) [pdf]
141–150 of 218 posts
Re: DeepSeek pause fundraise after comments on compute gap to US leaked (transcript) [pdf]
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
U.S. policymakers believe that even if the gap is small—like six months to a year—whoever reaches AGI first (whatever that means) could gain such an overwhelming advantage over their perceived adversary that it would effectively kneecap them. (You can look at the kinds of things they mention—cyber, WMDs—to get a sense of what they mean.) Jensen Huang disagrees and has said AI is a marathon.
I feel like if you showed current frontier models to someone 10 years ago, they'd probably call it AGI. Does AGI have a clear definition or is it just a pair of goalposts on wheels?
The goalposts are moving, and their speed accelerates all the time.
Re: DeepSeek pause fundraise after comments on compute gap to US leaked (transcript) [pdf]
#143I think the way to parse the current title "DeepSeek pause fundraise after comments on compute gap to US leaked (transcript) [pdf]" is that there was a leak that DeepSeek will pause fundraising because they perceive there is a compute gap with the US. I am also guessing that the majority of the people who read this title will think that DeepSeek is pausing this fundraising because some comments they made about the co…
I skimmed the doc and my impression is that your second listed interpretation -- DeepSeek is pausing investment because of a leak -- is the more correct one. There's quite a bit of confidential information in the doc about the company and how it's positioning itself going forward to compete with US labs. I'd imagine they're not happy at all with this being leaked and are withholding investment as a punitive measure.…
[dead]
Re: DeepSeek pause fundraise after comments on compute gap to US leaked (transcript) [pdf]
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
U.S. policymakers believe that even if the gap is small—like six months to a year—whoever reaches AGI first (whatever that means) could gain such an overwhelming advantage over their perceived adversary that it would effectively kneecap them. (You can look at the kinds of things they mention—cyber, WMDs—to get a sense of what they mean.) Jensen Huang disagrees and has said AI is a marathon.
I feel like if you showed current frontier models to someone 10 years ago, they'd probably call it AGI. Does AGI have a clear definition or is it just a pair of goalposts on wheels?
They would until you showed them the jagged edges.
Like those short videos of the guy asking the model to count up to 100, for example, where it politely agrees but never actually gets there
Re: DeepSeek pause fundraise after comments on compute gap to US leaked (transcript) [pdf]
#145Here's something I really don't understand: If as alleged Chinese open weight models are catching up with US anyway, and the performance is near US frontier model level but Chinese can do it with a fraction of cost, and eventually AI model will be commodified, wouldn't that means that the billion or even trillion dollars that US labs spend have only diminishing returns and the lead is only temporary? So why Deepseek…
U.S. policymakers believe that even if the gap is small—like six months to a year—whoever reaches AGI first (whatever that means) could gain such an overwhelming advantage over their perceived adversary that it would effectively kneecap them. (You can look at the kinds of things they mention—cyber, WMDs—to get a sense of what they mean.) Jensen Huang disagrees and has said AI is a marathon.
All the AGI (which is a misnomer, ASI is preferred) talk is about the moment of singularity, which is where the growth at the third derivative is increasing, so the gap (in the absolute) between first place and others, even if it's one month, will be ever increasing as time progresses.
I also have a hard time believing this narrative because limiting factors prevail such as compute and energy. These constraints will take many many years to overcome.
Re: DeepSeek pause fundraise after comments on compute gap to US leaked (transcript) [pdf]
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
They want to achieve AGI first because, once it is achieved, no one knows what the world will look like.
But this will not be a singular event. And like humans it does not mean that the smartest makes the best decisions.
More like a singularity event.
Re: DeepSeek pause fundraise after comments on compute gap to US leaked (transcript) [pdf]
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
U.S. policymakers believe that even if the gap is small—like six months to a year—whoever reaches AGI first (whatever that means) could gain such an overwhelming advantage over their perceived adversary that it would effectively kneecap them. (You can look at the kinds of things they mention—cyber, WMDs—to get a sense of what they mean.) Jensen Huang disagrees and has said AI is a marathon.
All the AGI (which is a misnomer, ASI is preferred) talk is about the moment of singularity, which is where the growth at the third derivative is increasing, so the gap (in the absolute) between first place and others, even if it's one month, will be ever increasing as time progresses. I also have a hard time believing this narrative because limiting factors prevail such as compute and energy. These constraints will…
It also assumes that "intelligence" is a limiting factor. It's hard to imagine there are any domains today, or almost any, which are bottlenecked on intelligence.
Re: DeepSeek pause fundraise after comments on compute gap to US leaked (transcript) [pdf]
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
U.S. policymakers believe that even if the gap is small—like six months to a year—whoever reaches AGI first (whatever that means) could gain such an overwhelming advantage over their perceived adversary that it would effectively kneecap them. (You can look at the kinds of things they mention—cyber, WMDs—to get a sense of what they mean.) Jensen Huang disagrees and has said AI is a marathon.
They'd have to use the gap though to actually kneecap them in that time, or else it is just shoveling money into the fire. The missile gap for example after all was settled and done, didn't matter at all because not a single missile was ever fired off. All that money, resources, talent, secrecy, lives lost maintaining that secrecy, lives dedicated to furthering that technology and secrecy, it just has not paid off at…
Also why do we want to kneecap?
Re: DeepSeek pause fundraise after comments on compute gap to US leaked (transcript) [pdf]
#149Earlier quoted context omitted.
I shouldn't win too hard, because then I'll lose?
Yes. Once you're in such a comfortable position that you'll keep making lots of cash regardless of whether you do well or not, there is little incentive to make good decisions, let alone take risks. This is known as the "curse of Oil" and is also what Intel's decline is attributed to.
Catching up without overtaking
Re: DeepSeek pause fundraise after comments on compute gap to US leaked (transcript) [pdf]
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess they likely can't right now due to no hardware available, either cause of bans or already all booked.
I gather this is the whole point of the original article. It seems to have been pulled, so I can't confirm. At what point do the AI companies start building their own hardware, I wonder.
Other companies are investing and hardware design and manufacturing, so they won't duplicate the effort given the national drive it would be a waste.