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

DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

huggingface.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 485 posts

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#251

Post by bashtoni »

gradus_ad wrote: post #101

How will the Google/Anthropic/OpenAI's of the world make money on AI if open models are competitive with their models? What hurt open source in the past was its inability to keep up with the quality and feature depth of closed source competitors, but models seem to be reaching a performance plateau; the top open weight models are generally indistinguishable from the top private models. Infrastructure owners with acce…

This is exactly why the CEO of Anthropic has been talking up "risks" from AI models and asking for legislation to regulate the industry.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#252

Post by deaux »

jstummbillig wrote: post #41
zug_zug wrote: post #16

Well props to them for continuing to improve, winning on cost-effectiveness, and continuing to publicly share their improvements. Hard not to root for them as a force to prevent an AI corporate monopoly/duopoly.

How could we judge if anyone is "winning" on cost-effectiveness, when we don't know what everyones profits/losses are?

We can judge on inference cost because we do know what those are for open-weights models as there are a dozen independent providers that host these models and price them according to respective inference cost.

We can't judge on training cost, that's true.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#253

Post by deaux »

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #98
echelon wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't care if this kills Google and OpenAI. I hope it does, though I'm doubtful because distribution is important. You can't beat "ChatGPT" as a brand in laypeople's minds (unless perhaps you give them a massive "Temu: Shop Like A Billionaire" commercial campaign). Closed source AI is almost by design morphing into an industrial, infrastructure-heavy rocket science that commoners can't keep up with. The companies p…

I can’t think of a single company I’ve worked with as a consultant that I could convince to use DeepSeek because of its ties with China even if I explained that it was hosted on AWS and none of the information would go to China. Even when the technical people understood that, it would be too much of a political quagmire within their company when it became known to the higher ups. It just isn’t worth the political cap…

> Even when the technical people understood that

I'm not sure if technical people who don't understand this deserve the moniker technical in this context.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#254

Post by oceanplexian »

raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #225
tokioyoyo wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People say that, but everyone, including enterprises, are constantly buying Chinese tech one way or another because of cost/quality ratio. There’s a tipping point in any excel file where risks don’t make sense, if the cost is 20x for the same quality. Of course you’ll always have exceptions (government, military and etc.), but for private, winner will take it all.

What Chinese built infrastructure tech where information can be exfiltrated or cause any real damage are American companies buying? Chinese communication tech is for the most part not allowed in any American technology.

80% of the parts in iPhones are manufactured in China, and they have completely and utterly dominated in Enterprise (Ever heard of someone using a Blackberry in 2025? Me neither.) so there’s one example.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#255

Post by jazzyjackson »

subroutine wrote: post #140
tokioyoyo wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the Chinese model becomes better than competitors, these worries will suddenly disappear. Also, there are plenty startups and enterprises that are running fine-tuned versions of different OS models.

As a government contractor, using a Chinese model is a non-starter.

I don't know that it's actually prohibited. There is no Chinese telecommunications equipment allowed, no Huawei or Bytedance, but nothing prohibiting software merely being developed in China, not yet at least.

Although I did just check what regions AWS bedrock support Deepseek and their govcloud regions do not, so that's a good reason not to use it. Still, on prem on a segmented network, following CMMC, probably permissable

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#256

Post by jazzyjackson »

beowulf0x0 wrote: post #241
tehjoker wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

really a testament to how easily the us govt has spun a china bad narrative even though it is mostly fiction and american exceptionalism

[flagged]

Try not to accuse community members of being spies, sheesh.

American companies chose to manufacturer in China and got all surprised Pikachu when China manufactured copies for themselves.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#257

Post by deaux »

hhh wrote: post #180
tokioyoyo wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the Chinese model becomes better than competitors, these worries will suddenly disappear. Also, there are plenty startups and enterprises that are running fine-tuned versions of different OS models.

No… Nobody I work for will touch these models. The fear is real that they have been poisoned or have some underlying bomb. Plus y’know, they’re produced by China, so they would never make it past a review board in most mega enterprises IME.

For what it's worth, this is complete insanity when practically every mega enterprises' hardware is largely Made in China.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#258

Post by stingraycharles »

jstummbillig wrote: post #41
zug_zug wrote: post #16

Well props to them for continuing to improve, winning on cost-effectiveness, and continuing to publicly share their improvements. Hard not to root for them as a force to prevent an AI corporate monopoly/duopoly.

How could we judge if anyone is "winning" on cost-effectiveness, when we don't know what everyones profits/losses are?

You can use tokens/sec on something like AWS Bedrock (which hosts both open and closed models) as a proxy for “costs per token” for the closed providers.

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#259

Post by deaux »

siliconc0w wrote: post #105
raw_anon_1111 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can’t think of a single company I’ve worked with as a consultant that I could convince to use DeepSeek because of its ties with China even if I explained that it was hosted on AWS and none of the information would go to China. Even when the technical people understood that, it would be too much of a political quagmire within their company when it became known to the higher ups. It just isn’t worth the political cap…

[flagged]

> For example, a small random percentage of the time, it could add a subtle security vulnerability to any code generation.

Now on the HN frontpage: "Google Antigravity just wiped my hard drive"

Sure going to be hard to distinguish these Chinese models' "intentionally malicious actions"!

And the cherry on top:

- Written from my iPhone 16 Pro Max (Made in China)

Re: DeepSeek-v3.2: Pushing the frontier of open large language models [pdf]

#260

Post by pembrook »

gradus_ad wrote: post #101

How will the Google/Anthropic/OpenAI's of the world make money on AI if open models are competitive with their models? What hurt open source in the past was its inability to keep up with the quality and feature depth of closed source competitors, but models seem to be reaching a performance plateau; the top open weight models are generally indistinguishable from the top private models. Infrastructure owners with acce…

I call this the "Karl Marx Fallacy." It assumes a static basket of human wants and needs over time, leading to the conclusion competition will inevitably erode all profit and lead to market collapse.

It ignores the reality of humans having memetic emotions, habits, affinities, differentiated use cases & social signaling needs, and the desire to always want to do more...constantly adding more layers of abstraction in fractal ways that evolve into bigger or more niche things.

5 years ago humans didn't know a desire for gaming GPUs would turn into AI. Now it's the fastest growing market.

Ask yourself: how did Google Search continue to make money after Bing's search results started benchmarking just as good?

Or: how did Apple continue to make money after Android opened up the market to commoditize mobile computing?

Etc. Etc.

Post reply on HN