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

Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

finance.yahoo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 1001 posts

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#201

Post by joak »

franktankbank wrote: post #177
impossiblefork wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a very strange result. I believe that NVIDIA is overvalued, but if DeepSeek really is as great as has been said, then it'll be even greater when scaled up to OpenAI sizes, and when you get more out you have more reason to pay, so this should if it pans out lead to more demand for GPUs-- basically Jevon's paradox.

The architecture doesn't keep yielding better results, Jevon's paradox doesn't apply.

Anyhow, if you can deliver more with less, this is huge good news for AI industry.

After some readjustment we can expect AI companies to start using the new method to deliver more. Science fiction might happen sooner than expected.

Buy the dip.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#202

Post by WithinReason »

ReptileMan wrote: post #161
WithinReason wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox In economics, the Jevons paradox occurs when technological progress increases the efficiency with which a resource is used, but the falling cost of use induces increases in demand enough that resource use is increased, rather than reduced.

Yes but it will also mean that people wouldn't need cutting edge NVIDIA chips - it will be able to run on older node chips. Or from different manufacturers. So NVIDIA wouldn't be able to command the margins they do now. It may be great news for VRAM manufacturers tough.

They only need cutting edge to be competitive, and that will be true independently of efficiency. That's the point.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#203

Post by SebFender »

jart wrote: post #144
Dalewyn wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stock market is not the economy, Wall Street is not Main Street. You need to look at this more macroscopically if you want to understand this. Basically: China tech sector just made a big splash, traders who witnessed this think other traders will sell because maybe US tech sector wasn't as hot, so they sell as other traders also think that and sell. The fall will come to rest once stocks have fallen enough that…

Not really. The Magnificent Seven are the only thing propping up the whole US economy. If they go down, you go down.

Well said.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#204

Post by igleria »

alecco wrote: post #188
igleria wrote: post #67

I will never forget HN's not-made-in-the-US bias https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42514633

I think part of the problem was many/most previous models coming out of China were trained on eval data to cheat in the rankings. Quite an uphill battle for Deepseek.

Assuming that is true, which I don't have a reason to believe otherwise, only gave an excuse to the average reader to disregard without reading more than the title.

You can see a similar bias in academia with work originating outside EU/USA.

before someone thinks something strange regarding me, I can only tell you I'm not chinese, but Argentinian :)

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#205

Post by igleria »

Cumpiler69 wrote: post #169
igleria wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this same forum ignored deepseek one month ago, save for a few... open minded people.

"That forum" , just like the mobs in ancient Rome, doesn't operate on logic, it operates on emotional feelings and groupthink.

Indeed, although like you say, that is a property of forums rather than a unique trait of HN. I do love HN most of the time.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#206

Post by fancyfredbot »

maxglute wrote: post #179
fancyfredbot wrote: post #31

The people writing market commentary are simply making it up. The news about DeepSeek is not new and doesn't reduce the value of ASML. People are selling now because they are scared because the number went down.

ASML paper value is determined by equipment sales from projected compute supply/demand. CHIPS building redundant global fabs = glut from more excess capacity = less future sales. Stargate = excess demand from everyone spending 100s of billions of compute = need even more fabs = more future sales. Then DeepSeek = suddenly no need for that much future compute... if number of future compute demand relative to short term…

This would be an excellent explanation if DeepSeek had announced its model over the last weekend rather than weeks ago, and if R1 wasn't a COT reasoning model which needs a lot more inference time compute than other SOTA models like llama.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#207

Post by esperent »

maxglute wrote: post #167
esperent wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> DeepSeek spends $6 million in old H800 hardware to develop open source model that overtakes ChatGPT. DeepSeek claims that's what they spent. They're under a trade embargo, and if they had access to any more than that it would have been obtained illegally. They might be telling the truth, but let's wait until someone else replicates it before we fully accept it.

>been obtained illegally. PRC companies breaking US export control laws is legal (for PRC companies). Maybe they're trying to avoid US entity listing, lot's of PRC companies keep mum about growing capabilites to do so. But the mere fact Deepseek is publicizing means they're unlikely to care about the political heat that is coming and the ramifications. If anything, getting on US entity list probably locks in their em…

> PRC companies breaking US export control laws is legal

So long as they don't plan to do any business with the US or any of their allies I guess.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#208

Post by maxglute »

fancyfredbot wrote: post #206
maxglute wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ASML paper value is determined by equipment sales from projected compute supply/demand. CHIPS building redundant global fabs = glut from more excess capacity = less future sales. Stargate = excess demand from everyone spending 100s of billions of compute = need even more fabs = more future sales. Then DeepSeek = suddenly no need for that much future compute... if number of future compute demand relative to short term…

This would be an excellent explanation if DeepSeek had announced its model over the last weekend rather than weeks ago, and if R1 wasn't a COT reasoning model which needs a lot more inference time compute than other SOTA models like llama.

Information lag, especially with respect to PRC developments and technical developments. Taking 1-2 week for info to be shared and passed down info chain not unusual. IRC COT typically increase inference 1-5x depending on task complexity, i.e. instead of scaling down compute demand by 50x, it's 10x, which is still substantial. Could investors be panicking? Sure, but there's rational basis for doing so.

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#209

Post by baal80spam »

belter wrote: post #27
dogma1138 wrote: post #6

Good time to buy then, I don’t understand how stupid some traders can be. A more efficient model is better for NVIDIA not worse. More compute is still better given the same model. And as more efficient models proliferate it means more edge computing which means more customers with lower negotiating power than Meta and Google… This is like thinking that if people need to dig only 1 day instead of an entire month to ge…

NVDA is a totally manipulated stock. The company beat earnings in the last three quarters and the stock dropped 15% to 20% immediately after the results release. Every single time...

I don't think it's manipulated, just hot. As the old adage goes: "Buy the rumor, sell the news".

Re: Nvidia’s $589B DeepSeek rout

#210

Post by vicentwu »

alecco wrote: post #186
impossiblefork wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a very strange result. I believe that NVIDIA is overvalued, but if DeepSeek really is as great as has been said, then it'll be even greater when scaled up to OpenAI sizes, and when you get more out you have more reason to pay, so this should if it pans out lead to more demand for GPUs-- basically Jevon's paradox.

The limit is high quality data, not compute.

RL doesn't need that much static data, it needs a lot of "good" tasks/challenges and computation.
Post reply on HN