Why would my country blacklist DeepSeek? Perhaps crazy lunacy like: "Your product is too good and too inexpensive: consumers like US companies and individuals need to pay more for services."
US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
311–320 of 633 posts
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#312Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the publicly stated/marketing reason for capitalist America to put companies on the Entity List? Genuinely asking. Because to me it screams 'we were only for the free market until there was no competition'
Free Market vs. planned economy was always mostly talking points, not a consistent ideology imo. Even during the Cold War, American farms were heavily subsidized. The abundant supermarkets were not a product of free markets, they were a propaganda piece. Today the US is pretty far from being a free market. Tax deductions are subsidies. Industry subsidies fund things on the front end, and bailouts are essentially subs…
The US has abundant supermarkets to this day. It was overwhelmingly a product of the market economy and remains so. The US has between 45,000 and 75,000 supermarkets (75,000 if you include supercenter stores that also sell groceries). That's not counting smaller specialty food stores.
It's a product of consumer spending capacity (net disposable income), of which the US has an enormous amount and has for over a century relative to other nations.
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#313Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#314Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#315Earlier quoted context omitted.
I understand it's supposed to be obvious to all of us, but maybe just for fun, can you follow through? What is the next step in the nefarious plan?
Not OP, but IMO the Chinese are waging economic warfare by "commodifying the competition". US VC's and equity are massively invested in AI being very very profitable and as soon as it's not that becomes garbage debt on a balance sheet, and a lot of it. When money is invested it's expected to make a return. When a few people make bad investments they lose their bag, when many many people all make the same bad investme…
I'm also confused how China managed to convince so many US VC's to spend an insane amount on a technology with "no moat". China exporting cheap AI hurts American hyperscalars. But it doesn't induce the behavior in American hyperscalars that causes them to be vulnerable to cheap AI. It seems kind of patronizing to point the finger at China, rather than acknowledge the American (potential) misallocation of resources.
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#316Is DeepSeek really behaving different than other Chinese companies? Intellectual theft is ongoing and has been ongoing for decades. Besides security risks and foul play, it is impressive by just how much DeepSeek undercuts OpenAI and Claude. DeepSeek charges $0.87 per million output tokens compared to $50 for Fable and $30 for GPT-5.5.
Can you keep a straight face when you say IP theft while OpenAI and Claude have their entire business based on IP theft?
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#317So this is the other side of banning American models for non-Americans? And how exactly do they plan on enforcing all of this? Great Firewall of America? This is a complete joke. The malicious clowns behind this should be removed from power and prevented from ever holding any position of power in any form of governance system.
Video selfies and government document upload on hardware attested phones, of course.
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#318Earlier quoted context omitted.
DeepSeek rose to fame through stolen IP from U.S., and created shell companies to bypass U.S. law. Typical CCP-inspired behavior. The free world needs protection from abusers. I'm sure there's a ton of other abuses they've committed as they race to become China's preferred LLM.
OpenAI and Anthropic also rose to fame from stolen IP from the US. https://www.npr.org/2025/09/05/nx-s1-5529404/anthropic-settl...
Even if both groups did exactly the same thing, it would be irrational for the US to not bias itself in favor of its own businesses.
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#319If Chinese LLMs are successfully making people in the west defend China, then I think we have all the evidence we need to explain why they are giving away their models. The next step of course will be to get people using that ungodly cheap AI on Chinese servers. Which will also be defended because "I would never trust an American Lab".
Found the late-stage OAI/Anthropic bagholder lmao
Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks
#320- generating types for APIs
- generating boilerplate based on existing code
- improving existing code (adding error handling, timeouts, things like that)
- Writing SQL repository boilerplate / queries
- Creating implementations against hand written tests
- Helping me understand and implement APIs from third party libraries
- Writing documentation
I've spent like $2 in the last month and have used over 100 million tokens.
It's doubled my productivity and unlocked work that I could not have done before.
As an Australian, I'm not sure that I care about the safety of my data when it comes to LLMs. US companies already stole scores of data to train their models on and it's hard to imagine they suddenly grew some integrity. I'll care when regulators step in, until then it's out of my control so I'll just use the best price-to-productivity product available.