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

251–260 of 335 posts

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

#251

Post by t-3 »

SuperNinKenDo wrote: post #69
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.

Many speculate that the prevalence of anti-prop on Israel-Palestine was a big motivator. I thought this was rather reductionist until TikTok was allowed back temporarily, only for pro-Plaestine slogans to be suddenly banned when it returned. Is it the only motivation? No. Given the above and the fact that dozens of highly popular Chinese apps continue to be allowed, does it appear likely this is a leading reason? Pla…

Considering that the majority of the Congresscritter rhetoric I heard about the issue concerned TikTok as a vector for the spread of antisemitism, I'd guess you're correct.

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

#252

Post by duxup »

>” America cannot afford to empower our greatest adversary at the expense of our own strength. Ensuring American economic superiority means cutting China off from American ingenuity and halting the subsidization of CCP innovation.”

Meanwhile we seem interested in cutting research and pissing off our neighbors… presumably opening opportunities for China.

I don’t understand what if anything these Senators are thinking.

These guys are China’s best friends.

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

#253

Post by jameslk »

munchler wrote: post #223
jameslk wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Other than intellectual property concerns and some obtuse arguments about the model inciting others to break the law (which isn’t specific to China anyway), I’d be really curious what good arguments can be made about how it isn’t protected by the first amendment and how those arguments could target Chinese models specifically

Downloading and running software is not speech. (Just trying to steel-man the opposing argument.)

From my understanding, downloading and running software could be considered a form of conduct or could be considered a form of expression, depending on the intention (e.g. using an LLM to generate poetry would be expression). The latter would put it in a category that is covered by the first amendment. I'd imagine there would be quite an uphill battle to argue that using a specific LLM that has been made permissibly available isn't protected in some circumstances

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

#254

Post by dmead »

ijk wrote: post #7

On the one hand Hawley proposes a lot of things that don't ever get close to becoming law. On the other hand, we did ban TikTok (which is currently unavailable on the app stores because of the ban). I can think of few ways to more effectively destroy any US advantage in AI compared with the sheer efficiency of making it illegal to learn from what competing countries have achieved. From the article, it sounds like the…

Josh Hawley needs to be in jail.

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

#255

Post by xbmcuser »

mattmaroon wrote: post #32
dmix wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure it’s even worth speculating on a bill that’s merely been proposed. This one sounds DOA. But yeah TikTok ban was a very bad precedent, mostly because it was based on speculative risks, not hard proof of existing behaviour (TikTok not engaging didn't help at all either). Regardless of the merits I too hope it doesn’t have a ripple effect. National security is such a huge brush you could paint anything you want…

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.

the only reason the ban came down was AIPAC was not able to get them to ban or silent ban pro Palestine sentiment and voices like facebook etc do.They were wary of it before but suddenly a bill banning gets passed in days something that normally takes months

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

#257

Post by timnetworks »

superqd wrote: post #248

It is so deeply painful to witness in my lifetime how our nation's law makers have openly become so profoundly morally and intellectually bankrupt.

It was probably always a game. Explaining the difference between downloading the weights and using the website hosted in china is beyond our collective scope of interest/attention, and that's probably a bit worrying. The Crown would call Franklin intellectually bankrupt but here we are.

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

#258

Post by SuperNinKenDo »

gruez wrote: post #107
SuperNinKenDo wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the issue under discussion is whether or not this kind of law is applied gently and with consideration to seriousness, or whether it tends to be used as a club to make an example of people. I think Swartz is seen as an example of it being used as a club to make an example of people.

>I think the issue under discussion is whether or not this kind of law is applied gently and with consideration to seriousness, or whether it tends to be used as a club to make an example of people. I'm not sure how you got that impression from the original exchange of: >>[...] You get less jail time for committing 34 felonies. >up to 20 years. Realistically some kid downloading a model would get probation [...]

I didn't get that impression from the original exchange, I got it from the thread I am responding to involving Aaron Swartz being given as a counter-example to the last point, and inferring why somebody would use Aaron Swartz as a counter-example.

Seems I was right in that inference, given other responses to the thread since.

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

#259

Post by UncleOxidant »

pixl97 wrote: post #35
gruez wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where's the kid rotting in federal prison for downloading a mp3? Does the music/movie industry not have good enough lobbyists to make an example of a torrenter?

I don't know, you tell me what happend to that Aaron guy that ran Reddit?

I finally got around to watching "The Internet's Own Boy" the other day. He told his girlfriend as they were driving by the Whitehouse that didn't want to accept the plea deal and plead guilty "because felons can't work in that building" [the Whitehouse]. Oh, man, how times have changed.

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

#260

Post by janalsncm »

mattmaroon wrote: post #32
dmix wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure it’s even worth speculating on a bill that’s merely been proposed. This one sounds DOA. But yeah TikTok ban was a very bad precedent, mostly because it was based on speculative risks, not hard proof of existing behaviour (TikTok not engaging didn't help at all either). Regardless of the merits I too hope it doesn’t have a ripple effect. National security is such a huge brush you could paint anything you want…

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.

> I think it’s quite likely

This is speculating. In other instances, the national security apparatus has provided specific evidence when it existed which makes me believe there isn’t anything more than “XYZ could happen”.

In any case, I think we can do better than make laws based on secret evidence. This is supposed to be a democracy after all. Or something.

Post reply on HN