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

DeepSeek V4 – almost on the frontier

simonwillison.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 420 posts

Re: DeepSeek V4 – almost on the frontier

#361

Post by Aldipower »

deaux wrote: post #14

I'm surprised that people here don't care at all about these models openly training on your data, especially if you use them straight from the model developer. Whereas things like "GitHub now automatically opts everyone into using their code for model training" get hundreds of justifiably angry comments, I never see this brought up anymore on posts like these talking about using Chinese models through OpenRouter. Thi…

I am using DS4 via cortecs.ai. There is no training and it is GDPR-compliant. The flip side, it is expensive.

Re: DeepSeek V4 – almost on the frontier

#362

Post by Aldipower »

anonu wrote: post #284
twothreeone wrote: post #281

For a solo dev sure.. but isn't there a huge privacy difference between Anthropic and DeepSeek APIs as well? I assumed part of the cost for Anthropic was essentially a privacy premium.. (plus they offer B2B).

Presumably you can run open model in your own infra

Especially not as a solo dev. That would be way to expensive.

Re: DeepSeek V4 – almost on the frontier

#364

Post by ethbr1 »

skeledrew wrote: post #329
ethbr1 wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No creative effort was spent making it good at reverse engineering Oracle's database. That's the bit that's going to be nasty in evidence. 'So you didn't have any reverse engineering in your training or testing sets?'

Reverse engineering skill is just a byproduct of programming skill. They go hand in hand.

Yes.

Which is going to be hard to explain to a judge and jury, if it comes to that, how despite investing time, money, and effort (and no doubt test cases) into making a model better at reverse engineering... they shouldn't be liable when that model is used for reverse engineering.

Afaik, liability typically turns on intentional development of a product capability.

And there's no way in hell I'd take a bet against the frontier labs having reverse engineering training data, validation / test cases, and internal communications specifically talking about reverse engineering.

Re: DeepSeek V4 – almost on the frontier

#365

Post by giwook »

locknitpicker wrote: post #112
amelius wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aren't they all billing at discount?

> Aren't they all billing at discount? Microsoft just announced the availability of OpenAI GPT-5.5, which they are charging 30x for it. In contrast, they charge 7.5x for Claude Opus 4.6 and 1x for OpenAI GPT-5.4 Check out the token-based pricing, and compare GPT-5.5 with all other models. https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/reference/copilot-billing...

Actually it is $30 for GPT 5.5, $25 for both Opus 4.6 and 4.7.

If you're referring to the multipliers that are used for subscription-based usage, GPT 5.5 is not available yet (according to https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/reference/copilot-billing...) and Opus will be at 27x at the end of the month.

When I check GH Copilot right now, it looks like Opus 4.7 multiplier was increased to 15x (I think it was 6x just a few days ago) but 4.6 is still at 3x. But these relatively cheap multipliers exist only until the end of the month.

Re: DeepSeek V4 – almost on the frontier

#366

Post by baldai »

logicprog wrote: post #242
baldai wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I am happy it works well for you. For me personally I struggle finding good use-cases in general for these OOS models. I am lightly technical but I do not manually code. So my flow is /grill-me (can take hours), make plan, review plan with 2. model, implement, review after implementation. Maybe it is because my tasks are usually chunkier, or because I cant code myself that I struggle using cheaper models. Feels l…

In my experience, deep seek models are massively overrated in terms of how good they actually are at agantic usage, coding and writing, just because they are kind of the first open source entrant and the name a lot of people know. Try GLM 5.1, coding and writing just because they are kind of the first open source entrant and the name a lot of people know. Try GLM 5.1.

Isnt 5.5 Low just better? Its so fast, needs so little tool calls to get work done.

Re: DeepSeek V4 – almost on the frontier

#367

Post by giwook »

segmondy wrote: post #119
cheshire_cat wrote: post #69

While the cost are lower than frontier models there are two factors that make DS4 Pro and K2.6 not as cheap as they might look. For DS4 Pro there's a discount going on for the official API, which sometimes gets overlooked and mixed up in discussions. Simon uses the full price in the comparison, so that's not an issue here. The other issue is that DS4 Pro and K2.6 often use way more reasoning tokens than the frontier…

This is very false DS4 is super cheap. I would advise to begin by reading their release paper. https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Pro/blob/main... They introduce very novel methods to improve long context efficiency and attention. HCA & mCH. It requires only 27% of flops for inference and 10% for KV cache than v3.2. This makes it super efficient. Think of this. For flops, we can now serve more than 3x the…

Found the DeepSeek employee.

Re: DeepSeek V4 – almost on the frontier

#369

Post by mandeepj »

wg0 wrote: post #9

Deepseek v4 Pro feels like Claude Opus 4.6 in it's personality but here's what I did find out about costs: I did cut loose Deepseek v4 on a decent sized Typescript codebase and asked it to only focus on a single endpoint and go in depth on it layer by layer (API, DTOs, service, database models) and form a complete picture of types involved and introduced and ensure no adhoc types are being introduced. It developed a…

That’s the classic phenomenon of cheaper pricing due to offshoring! If your expenses are in dollars then for sure recovery is going to be in dollars as well. Why is that a surprise to anyone?

Re: DeepSeek V4 – almost on the frontier

#370

Post by ryandrake »

estearum wrote: post #356
ryandrake wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the same underlying principle. If I want to ask a software tool what the suicide rate is for my county, I do not expect it to come back with: "Naughty boy! You said an unsafe word! You're getting a strike, and if you get two more, you're banned." This is totally out of the ordinary for a software product, and is absolutely a modern invention. Replace "suicide" with whatever the "AI Safety" obsession word is toda…

> If I want to ask a software tool what the suicide rate is for my county, I do not expect it to come back with: "Naughty boy! You said an unsafe word! You're getting a strike, and if you get two more, you're banned." Did this happen? I just tested this query in Grok, Gemini, Claude, and ChatGPT and 0% of them admonished me or refused to return an answer. Just like every single conversation I've ever had on this topi…

That's why I said:

> Replace "suicide" with whatever the "AI Safety" obsession word is today

I don't know what those queries are, but original-OP made one and got a "strike", which is what spawned this thread.

Post reply on HN