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

Big AI sets out its terms for regulatory capture

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 76 posts

Re: Big AI sets out its terms for regulatory capture

#31

Post by lightedman »

bpodgursky wrote: post #25
toasty228 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anything it'll speed up their progress by forcing local solutions. https://www.heise.de/en/news/DeepSeek-orders-160-000-Huawei-...

> According to Bloomberg, supply bottlenecks for high-end memory and other key components could limit chip production this year. Since Huawei also has to serve other customers, DeepSeek might have to wait over a year for the full delivery, estimates Bloomberg. Like I said, it will delay the Chinese labs for a couple years. These are not even top-line chips. Frankly, China was not going to allow them to depend on NVID…

"Like I said, it will delay the Chinese labs for a couple years."

Not even that long. China can simply order its industries to stop supplying externally and go full-domestic. It has happened before in others parts of Chinese industry; it will happen again. As it stands China can easily build computational nodes at scale, and their LineShine supercomputer holds top place in the Supercomputer Top 500 at almost 2.2 exaflops. They have zero issues building performant hardware.

Couple of years? Their current technology level can make that less than a month.

Re: Big AI sets out its terms for regulatory capture

#32

Post by sschueller »

badsectoracula wrote: post #11

> Amodei, meanwhile, outlined some very specific things he wants from Washington: Stop selling Nvidia chips to China so its AI companies can’t build better models, and a crackdown on model distillation. You have to be the embodiment of hubris to believe the only reason a technologically advanced country of 1.4 billion people with several AI labs and government support can make competitive models is because they all d…

Also, distillation means paying US AI firms api fees. Do they want to loose that source of income as well?

Re: Big AI sets out its terms for regulatory capture

#33

Post by rayiner »

badsectoracula wrote: post #11

> Amodei, meanwhile, outlined some very specific things he wants from Washington: Stop selling Nvidia chips to China so its AI companies can’t build better models, and a crackdown on model distillation. You have to be the embodiment of hubris to believe the only reason a technologically advanced country of 1.4 billion people with several AI labs and government support can make competitive models is because they all d…

Underestimating China's capability to make homegrown technology is a mistake I could understand 20 years ago. Now it's just a sign of poor judgment.

Re: Big AI sets out its terms for regulatory capture

#34

Post by altcognito »

rglover wrote: post #28
toasty228 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have such a weird and outdated view of China, it's almost comical. It's like America's answer to everything bad coming to them is protectionism. They still think China is a third world country with a bunch of factories and polluting industries not able to do anything else other than manufacturing products for foreign companies

China played the smart long game and took advantage of America's ignorance and short-sighted thinking. They already "won" in the sense that they outmaneuvered the U.S. because they relied on flaws in human nature (specifically, greed). Their moves around AI are just more of the same clever behavior. I don't agree with all of their means for getting here, but to accomplish what they have in ~30 or so years [1] should…

China deliberately adopted western style market institutions. They joined the WTO. No, they aren't a fully westernized market, but they are closer to a competitive marketplace than the state dictating all of what will or will not be built.

I'm confused, what has America and the west lost the plot on? You would have preferred the west to exploit China more?

This framing of a zero sum game is counterproductive.

Re: Big AI sets out its terms for regulatory capture

#35

Post by akazantsev »

myaccountonhn wrote: post #14
bix6 wrote: post #3

Can anyone recommend me a viable alternative to these clowns? I would like to move my work (excel and light coding) off the big guys. My computer isn’t very powerful though so I need to upgrade or find hosted models (host my own?) that won’t steal my sensitive data? Edit: miss me with the downvotes. These guys are clowns. I want alternatives. Thank you to everyone offering help!

Opencode go for 10$ a month is fantastic. Just use it with Glm5.2-flash.

It's better to buy models directly from providers that guarantee the quality of their quantization. Otherwise, model quality is a gamble. You can pay the same $10 on Novita or with any other provider.

Re: Big AI sets out its terms for regulatory capture

#36

Post by rayiner »

toasty228 wrote: post #20
badsectoracula wrote: post #11

> Amodei, meanwhile, outlined some very specific things he wants from Washington: Stop selling Nvidia chips to China so its AI companies can’t build better models, and a crackdown on model distillation. You have to be the embodiment of hubris to believe the only reason a technologically advanced country of 1.4 billion people with several AI labs and government support can make competitive models is because they all d…

They have such a weird and outdated view of China, it's almost comical. It's like America's answer to everything bad coming to them is protectionism. They still think China is a third world country with a bunch of factories and polluting industries not able to do anything else other than manufacturing products for foreign companies

Your first point is correct, but your second point doesn't follow. Lack of protectionism is based on the notion that the U.S. will always be technologically one step ahead of China because China can only copy. That's what has gotten us to where we are. Note that China itself is a protectionist economy. So in some sense protectionism is recognizing that China has a pretty good industrial policy and copying it.

Re: Big AI sets out its terms for regulatory capture

#37

Post by black6 »

rglover wrote: post #28
toasty228 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They have such a weird and outdated view of China, it's almost comical. It's like America's answer to everything bad coming to them is protectionism. They still think China is a third world country with a bunch of factories and polluting industries not able to do anything else other than manufacturing products for foreign companies

China played the smart long game and took advantage of America's ignorance and short-sighted thinking. They already "won" in the sense that they outmaneuvered the U.S. because they relied on flaws in human nature (specifically, greed). Their moves around AI are just more of the same clever behavior. I don't agree with all of their means for getting here, but to accomplish what they have in ~30 or so years [1] should…

Unrestricted Warfare by Colonels Xiangsui and Liang is a must read. China's been on the path for quite a while.

Re: Big AI sets out its terms for regulatory capture

#38

Post by giantrobot »

bpodgursky wrote: post #17
badsectoracula wrote: post #11

> Amodei, meanwhile, outlined some very specific things he wants from Washington: Stop selling Nvidia chips to China so its AI companies can’t build better models, and a crackdown on model distillation. You have to be the embodiment of hubris to believe the only reason a technologically advanced country of 1.4 billion people with several AI labs and government support can make competitive models is because they all d…

Nobody thinks a distillation crackdown is a long term plan, but it does delay Chinese labs for the couple years while they are compute-starved. Of course they could make competitive models if they were drowning in NVIDIA chips but they aren't, and the native ones aren't at scale production for at least a year.

But they're not compute starved. NVidia's kit is convenient for compute but not absolutely necessary. Chinese labs have been training with Huawei chips already. They also have a huge supply of existing Nvidia gear to use. Just because it's not the absolute latest generation isn't really important.

Also as we have seen, the Chinese labs will just buy their kit through cut outs or do training in locations where there's no embargo.

Re: Big AI sets out its terms for regulatory capture

#39

Post by mcshicks »

I think there is an obvious example in the FAA of a successful safety regulation of another potentially dangerous technology industry. A similar agency would seem to me like a logical starting point. I did some minor work a long time ago in commercial avionics software and while it was a very tedious process I did have confidence in it. Obviously a lot of things would have to be different but the basic structure of development and testing standards, record keeping, transparency, and government incident investigation seems like the place to start.

Re: Big AI sets out its terms for regulatory capture

#40

Post by dfxm12 »

badsectoracula wrote: post #11

> Amodei, meanwhile, outlined some very specific things he wants from Washington: Stop selling Nvidia chips to China so its AI companies can’t build better models, and a crackdown on model distillation. You have to be the embodiment of hubris to believe the only reason a technologically advanced country of 1.4 billion people with several AI labs and government support can make competitive models is because they all d…

I don't think Amodei is dumb. He just doesn't want to compete for the chips. Sinophobia sells right now, so this is the angle he's going with.
Post reply on HN