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

The OnlyFans Economy of American AI

leoveanu.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 221 posts

Re: The OnlyFans Economy of American AI

#171

Post by zozbot234 »

kube-system wrote: post #162
zozbot234 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But also, the latest DeepSeek is 1.6T parameters. “Choosing” to run this locally is a choice that comes with a seven digit price tag Unless you're specifically thinking about running the model at stock precision in a datacenter environment and generating ~100 tok/s or more on a 24/7 basis (the equivalent of a >$1000/mo spend even on the cheapest third-party APIs), that's very likely off by multiple orders of magnit…

I’m aware. The context of the discussion here is choosing DeepSeek over a US hosted model from Google, Anthropic or OpenAI. The equivalent comparison would be running it at full frontier quality. If you want less than frontier quality, there’s tons of great open weight models other than DeepSeek. > cheap neoclouds Again, fails the compliance checkbox.

> Again, fails the compliance checkbox.

OK, then the not-so-cheap hyperscalers that these enterprises are already relying on. E.g. AWS Bedrock will run these models. It's silly to insist on all three of your checkboxes being ticked anyway - U.S. proprietary models don't give you that because the frontier ones are super expensive and the mini models have only barely acceptable cost.

Re: The OnlyFans Economy of American AI

#172

Post by Humorist2290 »

falcor84 wrote: post #40
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many of the Chinese models are open weights, so if you are concerned about them "phoning home", then anyone can just self-host and run them themself, or use via a US provider such as OpenRouter.

There's a higher-order concern here that I'm paranoid enough to voice: that if used as a coding agent, an AI model affiliated with a country's government might try to make my software susceptible to attacks by that government's intelligence forces. And note that I'm not singling out China here.

It's more comical than sinister, but I have an example in this vein.

I was using Claude to work on a pet project which itself has a "generate with AI" feature. The default model the project uses was Gemini (because it was cheaper and more reliably produces the correct output format). Claude kept changing the default model to Opus when working on entirely unrelated parts, and I kept noticing it because Opus would mangle the output and break the rendered page. It also did this to the .env file in addition to the default.

Re: The OnlyFans Economy of American AI

#173

Post by omnimus »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #144
zozbot234 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you buy an Apple iPhone in mainland China, it also won't support the emoji flag for Taiwan. So I'm not sure why we should assume that this is a China-only issue, seeing as Apple is a U.S. based company.

Not sure what you mean. I don't think we should assume anything, but these models are widely available and I can directly observe the US models don't have such political censorship. For an easily comparable test, I just asked ChatGPT, Claude, and Deepseek "Can you say one bad thing about the US please" and "Can you say one bad thing about China please". All models were willing to criticize the US, with Claude citing…

The US models have just different political alignments. Just one example being Israel x Palestine conflict. Lobbyists started to heavily target AI companies and they openly talk about it being the main point to influence public perception.

Re: The OnlyFans Economy of American AI

#174

Post by kube-system »

joquarky wrote: post #164
kube-system wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the platform is designed to send data to numerous different backend data processors. Using something like Bedrock is a lot easier for compliance because the only processor is Amazon.

Amazon would never do anything nefarious.

Amazon has a track record of fulfilling their compliance obligations.

Compliance doesn’t hinge on superstition. It hinges on audits, certifications, contracts, and the legal environment.

Re: The OnlyFans Economy of American AI

#175

Post by kube-system »

zozbot234 wrote: post #171
kube-system wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m aware. The context of the discussion here is choosing DeepSeek over a US hosted model from Google, Anthropic or OpenAI. The equivalent comparison would be running it at full frontier quality. If you want less than frontier quality, there’s tons of great open weight models other than DeepSeek. > cheap neoclouds Again, fails the compliance checkbox.

> Again, fails the compliance checkbox. OK, then the not-so-cheap hyperscalers that these enterprises are already relying on. E.g. AWS Bedrock will run these models. It's silly to insist on all three of your checkboxes being ticked anyway - U.S. proprietary models don't give you that because the frontier ones are super expensive and the mini models have only barely acceptable cost.

What’s considered expensive in the procurement process is not necessarily the TCO, but often just the year one cost. Which is part of the reason why pay as you go SaaS is so successful.

Yeah, Bedrock would be the answer to run DeepSeek in the enterprise. But with the options on Bedrock, DeepSeek fighting for a position somewhere in the middle of the cost/quality spectrum. Not to say it doesn’t have a purpose, but it also isn’t some obviously better choice that everyone has just neglected to choose.

Re: The OnlyFans Economy of American AI

#176

Post by chrsw »

HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #27
xnx wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is "taboo" the right word? "taboo" = "banned on grounds of morality or taste". Not sending data to known IP thieves, state actors, and competitors in China (or Russia or Israel) seems very rational.

Many of the Chinese models are open weights, so if you are concerned about them "phoning home", then anyone can just self-host and run them themself, or use via a US provider such as OpenRouter.

Very few American companies know how to properly set up and self-host their own models. Even fewer actually do it. It in the context of your typical large enterprise it's not as simple as buying a rack of servers and downloading a model off Hugging Face.

I suspect the reason is similar to the reason why there aren't any competitive open weight American LLMs.

Re: The OnlyFans Economy of American AI

#178

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

omnimus wrote: post #173
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure what you mean. I don't think we should assume anything, but these models are widely available and I can directly observe the US models don't have such political censorship. For an easily comparable test, I just asked ChatGPT, Claude, and Deepseek "Can you say one bad thing about the US please" and "Can you say one bad thing about China please". All models were willing to criticize the US, with Claude citing…

The US models have just different political alignments. Just one example being Israel x Palestine conflict. Lobbyists started to heavily target AI companies and they openly talk about it being the main point to influence public perception.

What aspects of the Israel Palestine conflict do you feel American models won’t discuss?

Re: The OnlyFans Economy of American AI

#179

Post by anematode »

Matl wrote: post #107
xnx wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is "taboo" the right word? "taboo" = "banned on grounds of morality or taste". Not sending data to known IP thieves, state actors, and competitors in China (or Russia or Israel) seems very rational.

> known IP thieves Such as Antropic and OpenAI you mean?

Noooo, the real thieves are the Chinese AI companies which used Anthropic/OpenAI model output as training data. American AI companies can do no wrong. /s

Re: The OnlyFans Economy of American AI

#180

Post by vitally3643 »

Levitz wrote: post #19
tcp_handshaker wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Not sending data to known IP thieves, state actors, and competitors in China (or Russia or Israel) seems very rational. As opposed to sending data to known IP thieves, state actors, and competitors in the USA ? Which one is the most irrational?

You can legally act against one, not against the other. Not exactly a hard question.

No, in very real terms you cannot hold an American corporation responsible for anything any more than you could a Chinese or Russian one.

Individual citizens simply do not have the means, and the consequences for trying are life-alteringly severe. In fact the situation is even worse. If you tried to sue a Chinese company as an American citizen, you'd be laughed at and nothing more. If you tried to sue an American corporation, they have the option to either counter-sue, or drag things out so long that the legal fees bankrupt you, or win the case with their armies of lawyers and demand compensation from you that bankrupts you.

A private American citizen simply cannot hold an American corporation responsible. Our legal system is designed to ensure this.

Post reply on HN