By this article, "the US" is not winning. Sam, Dario, Elon, Zuck, etc. are.
It remains what benefit, if any, Americans will see from all this...
The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization
291–300 of 718 posts
Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization
#292The winner in the long term will be the one that will deliver the best performance and low-memory ratio for local models. Anthropic, OpenAI and Mistral are just companies that are making money right now (still not profitable), but will lost their tractions and values in the long term. However, I am more appealing to see how OpenCode Go subscriptions will go in the future: cheaper than big techs, more tokens, and they…
Local models will never compete with large SOTA models, in the same way an iPhone doesn't compete with supercomputers doing nuclear simulations. They paths will differentiate and split. Probably SOTA models will eventually be locked down and only accessible to state actors because of how expensive they will be to run (already started with Mythos).
You are missing the point. Parents says the market to win need economical models more than SOTA models. Whoever is running those nuclear simulations is not making as much as Apple.
Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization
#293The winner in the long term will be the one that will deliver the best performance and low-memory ratio for local models. Anthropic, OpenAI and Mistral are just companies that are making money right now (still not profitable), but will lost their tractions and values in the long term. However, I am more appealing to see how OpenCode Go subscriptions will go in the future: cheaper than big techs, more tokens, and they…
Local models will never compete with large SOTA models, in the same way an iPhone doesn't compete with supercomputers doing nuclear simulations. They paths will differentiate and split. Probably SOTA models will eventually be locked down and only accessible to state actors because of how expensive they will be to run (already started with Mythos).
Isn't Mythos mostly hype though?
Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization
#294No, they are not. They are winning because West is forbidden to use Chinese models for anything work-related.
My understanding is that it's not that the _models_ are banned, but rather the _platform_ is banned. It is acceptable to host, say, `deepseek-r1-distill-qwen-7b` and run it yourself, for example. It is not acceptable (to the authors of these bans) to download the DeepSeek app and run it on your work device.
We aren't allowed to use any unauthorized models even locally.
Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization
#295Earlier quoted context omitted.
Local models will never compete with large SOTA models, in the same way an iPhone doesn't compete with supercomputers doing nuclear simulations. They paths will differentiate and split. Probably SOTA models will eventually be locked down and only accessible to state actors because of how expensive they will be to run (already started with Mythos).
You are missing the point. Parents says the market to win need economical models more than SOTA models. Whoever is running those nuclear simulations is not making as much as Apple.
If we extend this line of thinking, China might be on leading that race.
Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization
#296Alibaba's cloud is something that the author of this article seems to dismiss. It's being used massively in Asia and they're pretty close in services and offerings to what AWS, GCP and Azure provides. Once they start doing inference on their own custom chips it might be hard to compete with them due to the energy costs
No, Alibaba is excellent top-5 easily.
Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization
#297Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the main question for me is, why is this a war? It's a war because the hinted promise behind the hype that the first organization to reach some as-yet-entirely-theoretical AGI that can bootstrap itself to godlike capabilities will then Install Planetary Overlord* and rule the world as near-deities themselves, with the rest of the (surviving) human race as their slaves. I think it's a nonsensical idea, but that's th…
This is a war because the media says it's a war. The media says it's a war because AI companies are paying them to say it's a war [0]. When AGI comes the threat won't be from which primate turned it on, but from how well AGI is aligned with humanity. All of the war talk is to distract from the alignment problem and instead force investment in hardware infrastructure. [0] https://www.wired.com/story/super-pac-backed-b…
Before AGI can choose for itself, it will depend on its creators to decide what it values and how it behaves. We can see how that works whenever grok gets the answer factual.
Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization
#298No, they are not. They are winning because West is forbidden to use Chinese models for anything work-related.
You’re saying if we were allowed to use e.g. qwen more broadly the US wouldn’t be in the same strategic position? We have the best models…we own all the companies that make the best infra and the hyper scalers…I don’t think “oh we can use Qwen now?” Would exactly devastate the US
Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization
#299No, they are not. They are winning because West is forbidden to use Chinese models for anything work-related.
Do we have any solid evidence these models can outperform Western models in terms of quality? Or is it more: because they are forbidden, they can't get enough training data, visibility etc. to compete?
Re: The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization
#300I continue to be impressed by our collective willingness to engage with obvious AI slop, as long as it also talks about AI. Sincere question for any of the nearly 300 folks seem to be arguing about the article: why? The author couldn't be bothered to present their case, so they probably don't care about our opinion. They just want traffic and search ranking with the least amount of effort. The community is literally being played for clicks.
Is it just that the subject line alone is a springboard for casual discussion? If so, maybe that's fine, but then, it feels like we'd be better off cultivating these discussions as "ask HN" posts instead of boosting this kind of web content.