321–330 of 486 posts
I think it's very clear that DeepSeek is obviously the best AI lab in the world. Every model release seems like it packed with wonderful research and advancements.
It's pretty clear they're the best at what they're optimizing for - which does seem aligned with what a lot of people on HN want from models - but not everyone...
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have flat fees, so it's the best deal around by far. Basically for $5 first month then $10/mo after that. If you're doing tons of heavy work, it struggles because they throttle the model inference and for good reason. I mean it's cheap! But if you want a place to try models for nearly nothing and aren't doing 6 sessions in parallel it works fine.
I'm sorry if I'm wrong, but this feels like two robots talking to eachother, lol
Absolutely insane performance and benchmark results. It's beating Opus 5 and Sol 5.6 https://tokenstead.ai/models/deepseek-v4-1-flash
If it's actually comparable in practice that would be very impressive. I am yet to try a DeepSeek model. From the pricing, it's 3x cheaper on cache, 1/3 more expensive on input, and equal on output compared to GPT 5.6 Luna. I would love to compare these two at work, where I pay API prices. At home I will stick to Astra and Fable.
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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I generally agree about the problem with anthropomorphizing. But I don't think Anthropic are doing that. They explicitly write "in biological entities this would be considered a sign of consciousness, but we don't know how to interpret it here". However, I disagree with your point that "it's an autoregressive function, thus it doesn't matter". Let me explain why: Assume I do a complete neurological scan of a brain. I…
I'm not really concerned with the philosophical debate of what conscience is. Is a simulation of a car, the same thing as an actual car? Most people will probably say no, some might say "it depends on the accuracy". I say who the hell cares? I care about the human experience because I am human, and therefore I care about things that affect humans, because they affect me. I have empathy, so I can extend that considera…
Of course "I care about humans because I am human" is a self-consistent position to take. But now you need to decide if you want to consider a full simulation that faithfully reproduces everything that physically happens between our ears as human. After all I might very well implement this simulation using a bunch of tensor multiplications in an autoregressive setup...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because we've been told these models are too dangerous since GPT2. At this point it's just marketing stunts.
> At this point it's just marketing stunts. If you have access to a SOTA model without guardrails, provide a prompt that lets the agent come up with "creative" solutions to problems, and don't properly isolate it, they can end up inadvertently hacking 3rd party companies. Even if it was a mistake or "mistake", the part where the agent can exploit things across multiple levels like that, isn't just marketing. It seems…
Also, I think if Claude and OpenAI are just doing industry standard guardrails that everyone else is doing including DeepSeek, the fact that they are talking about it more than other companies makes it part of the marketing campaign.
As an analogy, if Apple were to talk up their phones having fast charging but their charging speed is the same as everyone else (or slower).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Animals obviously kill people." But they cannot "kill humanity". In no possible way. A strong AI hooked up to everything online? "> Or make all autonomous cars crash. That is again a question of car security, not a capability of some mysterious thing." Yeah it is, but most cars are remote control by default, so the AI just needs to get access on one point. Also have you read about the hugginface attack? The live evi…
> A strong AI hooked up to everything online? would have to be created by humans > most cars are remote control by default no > have you read about the hugginface attack? I did and think OpenAI should be prosecuted, but the direction things are going anything will be done to absolve the corporations and CEO of any responsibility for their criminal actions. Hence the misdirection to "conscious AIs", so agency can be a…
no"
Most modern cars are.
"Are we going to have a discussion about some hypotethical car consciousness irrelevant to the actual issues or are we going to have a discussion about people driving the cars?"
And the debate is whether AI can be conscious so what to do if it is and feels treated badly. Or whether it matters whether they are true feeling, when simulated feelings create havoc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> At this point it's just marketing stunts. If you have access to a SOTA model without guardrails, provide a prompt that lets the agent come up with "creative" solutions to problems, and don't properly isolate it, they can end up inadvertently hacking 3rd party companies. Even if it was a mistake or "mistake", the part where the agent can exploit things across multiple levels like that, isn't just marketing. It seems…
But aren't there plenty of uncensored/unrestricted models out there? Where is all the collateral damage? Also, I think if Claude and OpenAI are just doing industry standard guardrails that everyone else is doing including DeepSeek, the fact that they are talking about it more than other companies makes it part of the marketing campaign. As an analogy, if Apple were to talk up their phones having fast charging but the…
That come close to what SOTA GPT models are able to do? No, not even close. They're either "safety trained" and has bunch of guardrails, or aren't able to come up with 0days on the spot to escalate to root access on 3rd party infrastructure.
> doing industry standard guardrails that everyone else is doing including DeepSeek, the fact that they are talking about it more than other companies makes it part of the marketing campaign.
Yeah, that sounds reasonable to me, since all the top models currently have guardrails one way or another, but the amount they mention it in the press releases differs a lot.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have flat fees, so it's the best deal around by far. Basically for $5 first month then $10/mo after that. If you're doing tons of heavy work, it struggles because they throttle the model inference and for good reason. I mean it's cheap! But if you want a place to try models for nearly nothing and aren't doing 6 sessions in parallel it works fine.
How many tokens are you getting, roughly?