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

Deepseek: The quiet giant leading China’s AI race

chinatalk.media

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 476 posts

Re: Deepseek: The quiet giant leading China’s AI race

#141

Post by tokioyoyo »

qwertox wrote: post #96
paganel wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It remains to be seen how stable a totalitarian government can be Much more stable than the government that has Trump, Musk and Vivek calling the shots, that's for sure.

If these three died, it might be a loss to the country. None of them is as important to the country as Xi is to China. The resilience of the CCP, in light of its dependence on Xi, can only be upheld through the absolute suppression of freedom. But the average daily life is certainly much more enjoyable than in NK.

I’m curious, what do you think would happen if Xi stepped down tomorrow for whatever reason? You think everything will just fall apart?

Re: Deepseek: The quiet giant leading China’s AI race

#142

Post by tokioyoyo »

cynicalsecurity wrote: post #71

China doesn't limit their AI research with so called safety and other concerns, but we do. Who is going to win? Somehow I don't think this is going to be us.

They do. I swear this entire thread is just full of two extremes of misinformations from both sides.

Re: Deepseek: The quiet giant leading China’s AI race

#143

Post by Duwensatzaj »

tossandthrow wrote: post #85
Workaccount2 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trying to equate government mandated censorship to private company policy censorship is a wholly dishonest sleight of hand.

Both in the EU and the US there is plenty of regulation that mandates these types of censorship - and with reason. In the US there is 18 U.S.C. § 842(p). In the EU there is the entire AI Act. But I am sure you can yourself chat your way through to figure out what legislation companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are under.

18 U.S.C. § 842(p). criminalizes bomb instructions when taught with the intent of committing crimes.

TM 31-210 Improvised Munitions Handbook is readily available.

Re: Deepseek: The quiet giant leading China’s AI race

#144

Post by d0mine »

csomar wrote: post #107
nsoonhui wrote: post #13

I find that the gushing around deepseek is fascinating to watch. To me there are a few structural and fundamental reasons why deepseek can never outperform other models by a wide margin. On par maybe--as we reach the diminishing returns with our investment in the models, but not win by a wide margin. 1. The US trade war with china which will place deepseek compute availability at disadvantages, eventually, if we ever…

You are comparing apple to oranges. Claude is better, sure, and I'd probably use it over deepseek but deepseek is an open model. For me, this makes deepseek quite superior (not from a benchmark/output perspective) to all the other closed models.

I've used both Claude and Deepseek for code. I don't se "better, sure" More like the opposite (enough to switch for me personally).

Re: Deepseek: The quiet giant leading China’s AI race

#145

Post by modeless »

lomkju wrote: post #6

I feel the GPU restrictions created an environment for Chinese Devs to be more innovative and do more with less. Kudos to the deepseek team!

Software expands to fill the available resources. If you want more efficient software, build it on less powerful hardware. AI training runs are no exception!

Re: Deepseek: The quiet giant leading China’s AI race

#146

Post by yoavm »

Bilal_io wrote: post #46
pmarreck wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but there should be a difference between providing answers about provably dangerous things and providing provably false answers for political reasons. For example if there is a Russian LLM that refuses to answer any questions about homosexuality while also saying it's wrong, that's demonstrably false from an empirical basis. But the western LLM's are also doing this latter type of thing already. If you ask any o…

Western LLMs have a bias when it comes to Israel and Palestine issue. Out of curiously, what part of the Quran do you consider controversial?

Not the OP, but here's one I feel quite uncomfortable with: https://quran.com/en/an-nisa/155/tafsirs - "The Hour will not start, until after the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them. The Jew will hide behind a stone or tree, and the tree will say, `O Muslim! O servant of Allah! This is a Jew behind me, come and kill him".

Other examples from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An-Nisa include "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women", "whoever fights in Allah’s cause—whether they achieve martyrdom or victory—We will honour them with a great reward". The list is kinda endless.

Re: Deepseek: The quiet giant leading China’s AI race

#147

Post by kayewiggin »

antirez wrote: post #110
nsoonhui wrote: post #13

I find that the gushing around deepseek is fascinating to watch. To me there are a few structural and fundamental reasons why deepseek can never outperform other models by a wide margin. On par maybe--as we reach the diminishing returns with our investment in the models, but not win by a wide margin. 1. The US trade war with china which will place deepseek compute availability at disadvantages, eventually, if we ever…

1. The Chinese internal market is huge, and in case they develop models that are better than western models, not using them will be a disadvantage for us, not them. Also I can see many European countries (including my country, Italy) to buy Chinese AI regardless of US regulations. 2. Western has its own issues with data limits and extreme alignment that makes models dumber. In general I don't think the Chinese govern…

1.) EU will soon have rules to prevent Chinese AI from proliferating, since China is ramping up on its support of Russia invasion of Europe - China Is Cutting Off Drone Supplies Critical to Ukraine War Effort [1]. China is reportedly making drones for Russia instead, according to multiple intelligence officials.

2.) Chinese models have to censor a long list of words that threatens the government, which makes them super dumb. List of stupid words example: sprinkle pepper, accelerationism, my emperor, lifelong control, etc. and the list of censored words grow(!!) as Chinese citizens try different combination of words to escape censorship.

3.) not even sure what this sentence means and how it makes Chinese models better

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-12-09/china-is-...

Re: Deepseek: The quiet giant leading China’s AI race

#148

Post by daveguy »

pphysch wrote: post #127
daveguy wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Largely successful? I wouldn't confuse Chinese propaganda to the outside world with success.

The Chinese government treated the pandemic as a bioweapon attack by a foreign adversary engaged in a broader hybrid war, and it did so effectively.

That's batshit insane.

Re: Deepseek: The quiet giant leading China’s AI race

#149

Post by daveguy »

bpodgursky wrote: post #128
daveguy wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Calling any US military base an "indefensible logistics hub" reveals that the extent of your research was probably just that Wikipedia listicle.

Believe whatever you want. Most of these bases are co-located with NATO or other allies for good reason, the US doesn't have to do everything itself wrt air defense, locating an airlift wing with a fighter wing. But then it's a lower bar than people imagine, for China to buy similar friendship.

You literally called the logistics hubs of the US military -- the bases that move more of the most powerful weapons and military personnel in the world -- indefensible. So you either don't know what indefensible means, or you are a piss poor propagandist.

Re: Deepseek: The quiet giant leading China’s AI race

#150

Post by tossandthrow »

Duwensatzaj wrote: post #143
tossandthrow wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both in the EU and the US there is plenty of regulation that mandates these types of censorship - and with reason. In the US there is 18 U.S.C. § 842(p). In the EU there is the entire AI Act. But I am sure you can yourself chat your way through to figure out what legislation companies like OpenAI and Anthropic are under.

18 U.S.C. § 842(p). criminalizes bomb instructions when taught with the intent of committing crimes. TM 31-210 Improvised Munitions Handbook is readily available.

Yep, anthropic has to comply with that.
Post reply on HN