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

US bill proposes jail time for people who download DeepSeek

404media.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 335 posts

Re: US bill proposes jail time for people who download DeepSeek

#161

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

spamizbad wrote: post #153
mattmaroon wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The risk from TikTok is possibly not speculative at all. I think it’s quite likely the national security apparatus knows something and informed congressmen because they went from being opposed to it to being in favor of it in a short time.

Is it? Because as soon as the ban went into effect and phones started to ring Congress very quickly changed its tune. If it was genuinely a national security threat you absolutely would NOT bend after a few hundred angry constituency calls.

Did congress change it's tune? From what I've seen, congress still wants to ban them, it's just that Trump has exutive ordered that he won't enforce the law.

Re: US bill proposes jail time for people who download DeepSeek

#162

Post by 9283409232 »

tzs wrote: post #151
9283409232 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Capital Records vs Jamie Thomas where Capital Records was awarded around 2 million in damages and Sony vs Joel Tenenbaum. These cases are not uncommon. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Records%2C_Inc._v._Tho... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_BMG_v._Tenenbaum

Those cases are extremely uncommon. In nearly every case what happened was: 1. The RIAA sent a letter telling how many songs you were distributing and offering a settlement of around $2-5 per song. Most people at this point realized that they were in fact guilty and that the RIAA had enough evidence to prove it in court and agreed to settle. 2. A small fraction ignored this or refused to settle. The RIAA then files l…

A very small number end up with a high profile but there are many John Doe or Jane Doe cases where names aren't publicized.

Re: US bill proposes jail time for people who download DeepSeek

#163

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

spamizbad wrote: post #153
mattmaroon wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The risk from TikTok is possibly not speculative at all. I think it’s quite likely the national security apparatus knows something and informed congressmen because they went from being opposed to it to being in favor of it in a short time.

Is it? Because as soon as the ban went into effect and phones started to ring Congress very quickly changed its tune. If it was genuinely a national security threat you absolutely would NOT bend after a few hundred angry constituency calls.

Congress didn’t change its tune. PAFACA is supported by 80% of legislators. It has more support than virtually any other legislation.

Re: US bill proposes jail time for people who download DeepSeek

#165

Post by verdverm »

johnea wrote: post #65

I wonder if one could get some member of the current congress to introduce a bill that proposes jailtime for the entire presidential cabinet? It wouldn't be any more stupid than this, and would probably solve a lot more of the US's problems...

The "Life Begins At Erection" bill is some good satire by a sitting Congress person

Re: US bill proposes jail time for people who download DeepSeek

#166

Post by blackeyeblitzar »

apparent wrote: post #5

If the rationale is to avoid sending data back to Chinese servers, then shouldn't there be a carveout for downloading a model you run locally?

It’s not just to avoid sending data back but to recognize the national security threat of allowing an adversary country’s products to access American markets (of users). It has implications for politics and technology competitiveness. When the adversary is an authoritarian communist dictatorship that provides no equal market access for American social media or search engines or whatever, I think a ban on everything is justified. In fact we should extend this beyond software, which is what tariffs would do.

Re: US bill proposes jail time for people who download DeepSeek

#167

Post by sockaddr »

aorloff wrote: post #52

Trump made this big announcement, and China bitchslapped him with math : We want it to be in this country and we're making it available. I'm going to help a lot through emergency declarations because we have an emergency. We have to get this stuff built. So, they have to produce a lot of electricity, and we'll make it possible for them to get that production done very easily at their own plants if they want, where th…

I felt like I was having a stroke while reading your comment and had to scroll back up to realize it was a Trump quote. Makes sense now.

Re: US bill proposes jail time for people who download DeepSeek

#168

Post by markus_zhang »

"Underpaid? Backbench MPs, Darling? Being an MP is a vast subsidised ego trip. It's a job for which you need no qualifications, no compulsory hours of work, no performance standards. A warm room and subsidised meals for a bunch of self-opinionated windbags and busybodies who suddenly find people taking them seriously because they got letters "MP" after their names. How can they be underpaid when there're about two hundred applicants for every vacancy? You could fill every seat twenty times over even if they have to pay to do the job."

-- Honorable ex Prime Minister Jim Hacker

Re: US bill proposes jail time for people who download DeepSeek

#169

Post by akoboldfrying »

majormajor wrote: post #132
Defletter wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is speech. I'm sorry but I have yet to see a single person who makes this point admit that it's a form of speech suppression. This is classic First Amendment precedent. Just because the speaker is someone you don't like, or its content is anti-American (or what have you), doesn't mean it's not protected speech.

What? Many people just don't think the First Amendment applies to foreign nations. (Why would it??) And that restrictions on corporate control/structure for the US-based parts are not speech issues (e.g. imagine if free speech was a defense against an anti-trust prosecution). The simplest case for banning TikTok is simple reciprocity. China is no longer a market that needs the level of protectionism they currently ha…

I think you're both conflating the concept of "free speech = good" with what forms of speech are, at this moment, permitted or forbidden by US law.

For someone who believes in the concept of free speech, the fact that US constitutional rights to free speech in practice almost certainly do not protect overseas business interests is really an embarrassing corner case. Even if you do genuinely consider national and foreign actors to be different kinds of entity, so that it could be ethically sound to protect one and not the other, there's a simple technical reason for constantly the distinction to be artificial: Free speech protection can be gained merely by funnelling the speech through an intermediary US citizen.

Re: US bill proposes jail time for people who download DeepSeek

#170

Post by l72 »

rsync wrote: post #137
mikestew wrote: post #2

Guess what I, a person who mere minutes ago had little interest in downloading DeepSeek, am doing right now? Paging Ms. Streisand…

What is a shell one-liner that downloads DeepSeek ?

If you have ollama:

  ollama run deepseek-r1:671b
That is 404GB, but there are smaller versions too.
Post reply on HN