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

DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 475 posts

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#61

Post by swiftcoder »

bbor wrote: post #27
kouteiheika wrote: post #13

It's so refreshing to see DeepSeek's tech report[1] full of juicy details; meanwhile, something like Fable's system card[2] is like 70% "safety", 10% "model welfare" to make sure little Claude isn't distressed, and 20% benchmark numbers. [1]: https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash/blob/... [2]: https://www.anthropic.com/claude-fable-5-1-mythos-5-1-system...

…are you sure a brave stance against safety and welfare is what we need in this moment? Why do you think your conception of the dangers are more accurate than all the scientists who have spent their lives studying this?

> scientists who have spent their lives studying this

Please point me to one actual accredited scientist who has spent a lifetime studying AI alignment? Pretty much this whole field is only 5 years old

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#62

Post by kouteiheika »

gpt5 wrote: post #47
rao-v wrote: post #20

As I also said on Twitter - it really amazes me how fearless Deepseek are. Every single model release is packed with new and crazy clever ideas and somehow, they always commit to training them at near frontier scale. I know everybody wants the tell all story of the clever ideas that were developed over the last ~3 years at Anthropic and OpenAI, but what I really want to thumb through is DeepSeek's notebook of "brilli…

[flagged]

> posts on American models are steered towards controversy and anti-AI sentiment, posts on Chinese models are full of blatant flattery

So why, for example, are posts on the Inkling[1] release (an American model) thread mostly positive? It's as if there's something else at play here, but I can't quite put my finger on it, hmm... :P

[1] -- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48924912

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#63

Post by zith »

10000truths wrote: post #38
bbor wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

…are you sure a brave stance against safety and welfare is what we need in this moment? Why do you think your conception of the dangers are more accurate than all the scientists who have spent their lives studying this?

Because safety and welfare have literally nothing to do with LLMs. They generate text. If someone is stupid enough to hook the text generator up to nuclear missile launchers and try to "align" it against nuclear annihilation with a "pretty please don't do that" prompt, I'm not going to blame the AI for the impending nuclear apocalypse, I'm going to blame the idiot who handed the big red button to the digital equivale…

Well, giving it access to a simple linux terminal is theoretically enough to cause more damage than most people are comfortable with, and doing so is trivial enough that it will be done (and has been, tens of thousands of times).

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#65

Post by [deleted] »

rao-v wrote: post #53
gpt5 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

umm what are you talking about? Basically this crowd (esp. folks like me who run medium models locally) like open stuff and can be a tiny bit unenthused about opaque mysteries handed down from on high. You'll see people delighted with Gemma releases and heck even IBM's Granite models (boring architecturally though they may be) every time they come out. Heck I was chuffed about gpt-oss-120b for weeks. @sama give us an…

[deleted]

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#66

Post by walrus01 »

kouteiheika wrote: post #52
bbor wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

…are you sure a brave stance against safety and welfare is what we need in this moment? Why do you think your conception of the dangers are more accurate than all the scientists who have spent their lives studying this?

Excuse me for not being interested in over 100 pages of how well the model can refuse and block my requests, especially considering how fun it is to waste my time trying to get around those restrictions when they inevitably trigger because the clanker thinks that I'm doing something naughty, all the while it can't reliably center the proverbial div without doing something stupid itself.

Meanwhile I have an uncensored qwen 3.8 27B here that will happily attempt to (as a crude and randomly chosen sampling of bad/evil things) give me the recipes for meth, how to make an IED, write a manifesto in support of a horrible ideology, or commit various forms of fraud. Now I certainly wouldn't recommend that anyone try to follow what it says to do, because it's almost certainly very wrong on key parts that would put its users in federal prison for the rest of their lives.

There's uncensored models out there which score 0 (zero refusals) on this "harmful behavior" dataset:

https://huggingface.co/datasets/mlabonne/harmful_behaviors

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#67

Post by danielspace23 »

Tomte wrote: post #18

If only they managed to tell the mobile app to tell the model to reply in English to English prompts. I suffix everything with "Reply in English", and even so I‘m getting lots of Chinese.

I think their system prompt is in Chinese and probably has instructions to prioritize answering in Chinese, since this has never happened to me via API, where I (or the coding harness) set the system prompt.

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#69

Post by myaccountonhn »

IshKebab wrote: post #37
kouteiheika wrote: post #13

It's so refreshing to see DeepSeek's tech report[1] full of juicy details; meanwhile, something like Fable's system card[2] is like 70% "safety", 10% "model welfare" to make sure little Claude isn't distressed, and 20% benchmark numbers. [1]: https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash/blob/... [2]: https://www.anthropic.com/claude-fable-5-1-mythos-5-1-system...

Wow there really is a model welfare section in there...

To me it reads like pure propaganda. Anthropic really wants us to think that they've made something sentient. I think that's really dangerous.

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#70

Post by karimf »

While this is very impressive benchmark-wise, GPT-6 Astra showed us that benchmarks don't always correlate 1:1 to intelligence of a model.

When Astra launched, I think Artifical Analysis showed that it was on par with GPT-5.6 Sol and lower than Opus or something like that? Then, they updated the scoring.

I hope that more open source models, including this model, to be "as good to use" as Astra.

Post reply on HN