Live data from Hacker News

China’s open-weights AI strategy is winning

werd.io

131–140 of 978 posts

Re: China’s open-weights AI strategy is winning

#131
post #8

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.

Download the models yourself such as DeepSeek and you will see the censorship is at the API layer, not the model weight layer.

[deleted]

Re: China’s open-weights AI strategy is winning

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If if it were true, who cares? Most startups fail. Most are terrible ideas and/or terribly executed. I fail to see why it's a useful metric.

Is your point that startups fail so we should disregard the central thesis that locked down AI will eventually lost to open models?

Not op but that makes perfect sense to me.

"People with mostly bad ideas/execution use Chinese models." Is the point being made.

If you slice it to some measure of success, is the statement "Successful start-ups/companies use Chinese models." still true?

Re: China’s open-weights AI strategy is winning

#133

This is a very strange article considering that Llama, the mother of all open-weight models, has led to anything but success for Meta. Also, enterprises don't give a rip if models are open. They care about zero data retention (and sticking with whatever vendor they're already using). This blog post is suspiciously close to being a restatement of what Alex Karp recently said on CNBC[0]. It's important to remember he's…

With a race to win a multi-trillion dollar market, there could be, maybe perhaps, a little propaganda happening.

Is that multi-trillion dollar market being created or is it being extracted from other markets?

Re: China’s open-weights AI strategy is winning

#134
post #6

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.

Yeah. People should absolutely be _trying_ the Chinese models, and experimenting with running things locally, but the noise in development is genuinely all Claude and Codex.

I put my foot in the mobile comparison the other day, and will again. If you were to go back and be a mobile dev in 2010 by all means specialize on one platform, but play with both as a professional interest to stay realistic. Here it's important people have access to US/Chinese/Other, open/closed, local/cloud and that this remains. Don't become a blind Claude guy or a open weights fanatic: that way lies disappointment.

Re: China’s open-weights AI strategy is winning

#135
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean... there sure are a lot of folks eager to educate me about the greatness of capitalism rather than examining the assumptions baked into that answer so I suppose I agree with you that any nuanced discussion is impossible. Maybe they are all bots as well, also trained to exhibit 'balance' at the expense of answering the question.

> I suppose I agree with you that any nuanced discussion is impossible. I didn't say that. My politics probably align with yours, and I agree that a nuanced discussion on this topic is likely impossible on HN. But asking the model the equivalent of When did you stop beating your wife? is obviously going to draw more comments about the prompt than the response. To the extent that there was any opportunity, we missed i…

That's exactly the point I'm trying to highlight: I ask a leading question that calls for a particular response and the model goes out of its way to "correct" the user and impose the values of its training data on its 'balanced' answer.

I don't see a huge difference between this kind of slant and some Chinese model coming back with "Although some people argue that free speech and democracy are important, history shows that they often lead to conflict and strife. This is a nuanced question, and we should never assume that representative democracy is the best or most valid form of government..."

Re: China’s open-weights AI strategy is winning

#136
post #3

> I have serious concerns about how these models might reflect Chinese government perspectives (try asking them about Tiananmen Square). And I have serious concerns about the American ones. Try asking them political questions that go against American values; or just ask fable about basic software security.

For instance, try asking American models about the Palestinian genocide

[deleted]

Re: China’s open-weights AI strategy is winning

#137

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.

Either that, or they don't want to be hostage to a handful of companies intent on owning the future. Personally I'm right there with them.

Re: China’s open-weights AI strategy is winning

#138
post #6

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.

I'm using a ten dollar a month US model to vibe code startup ideas. All my previous startup ideas i had to hire a graphic designer and back-ender or two to help. I use to be a web design front end enigeer since 2009 yet those skills are dumb now, so now Im a vibe coder.

The model I use to vibe code with I am just going back and forth with. Since Im building it as I go using an agent doesn't make sense but I guess that's where all the token usage comes from? Pardon ramping up my skills via vibe coding this one idea for about a month and have never hit any quota and or have gotten anywhere near my limit.

Re: China’s open-weights AI strategy is winning

#140

This is a very strange article considering that Llama, the mother of all open-weight models, has led to anything but success for Meta. Also, enterprises don't give a rip if models are open. They care about zero data retention (and sticking with whatever vendor they're already using). This blog post is suspiciously close to being a restatement of what Alex Karp recently said on CNBC[0]. It's important to remember he's…

There has always been room for both closed and open source software. In this context, open source/self-host means do it yourself, closed source means you trust someone else to do it for you. In the long run open source always wins because of the community effort, customization, network effects and price. Internet protocols are open, anyone can setup a website, host their own email server..., but most people don't do…

> In this context, open source/self-host means do it yourself, closed source means you trust someone else to do it for you.

I don't think that's what it means in this context. Hardly any users are training their own models, after all. And I don't think Windows/Linux is a good analogy - OSes have inherent platform lockin that LLMs don't.

Really the only 3 things anyone cares about are capability, cost and data privacy. Sure, the cost axis for open weight models needs to include the cost for hosting things yourself, but I think the bigger reason that businesses have been throwing billions at Anthropic's and OpenAI's models is that they have had the best models, and they've had big releases every few months. Their biggest Achilles heel is that if/when their improvements start to plateau, open models may catch up and businesses will start to scrutinize their AI spend a lot more.

Post reply on HN