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

US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 633 posts

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#521

Post by alfiedotwtf »

sandworm101 wrote: post #406
godelski wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 I'm not sure I understand this. I'm not defending the US, but isn't your data being in more hands worse? Also, isn't Australia in a more contentious situation with China? Them being more allied with the US and all? Not to mention the whole nuclear sub issue. Having data stolen is s…

China is not digging through my social media in order to find a reason to cut my grant funding. China isnt going to pull me over for speeding in montana only to examine my phone to see whether i am maga enough to get off with a warning. And china isnt at o'hare security scanning for anyone with skin darker than freshly fallen snow. China may be evil, but it is a far away evil that doesnt have a physical impact on my…

… the one closet to your canoe is loudly warning you of the dangers of the one still on the bank

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#522

Post by hodgehog11 »

apatheticonion wrote: post #481
hodgehog11 wrote: post #404

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely agree with this. As Louis Rossmann recently pointed out, it's the difference between a correct answer and a wrong answer; the correct answer is worth a good amount, while the wrong answer is worth nothing. Under this metric, for harder tasks, the most intelligent model is best per dollar.

That's why experience + cost effective model is IMO the best combination. Experience allows you to design the skeleton where the implementation details are often inconsequential. There are relatively few scenarios where an LLM would need more guidance to render an outcome, but even dumb local models can do that. Building a simple UI component vs an efficient multi-threaded bidirectional socket implementation (both ex…

This is mostly true and a month ago I would have agreed wholeheartedly. However, there are still situations where almost every line of code has to be deliberately chosen in a delicate way. Think research code or settings which demand a high degree of optimization. Opus or GPT-5.5 are absolutely miserable to guide in these settings.

"Well, don't use an AI for those purposes!"

That used to be true (and is now again true I suppose). Fable was a peek at something different, it seemed to be actually able to start to tackle these kinds of problems. That saves a lot of time, since checking these programs is often far, far easier than writing them. Experience is needed to check and scaffold still, but something like Fable becomes a prerequisite for these settings.

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#523

Post by bjackman »

grafmax wrote: post #424
apatheticonion wrote: post #320

I use DeepSeek every day (via VSCode Insiders and Zed Editor). It's very affordable and, while it's slightly behind Claude (not sure how far behind Fable), it suits my working style well. I'm not using unsupervised multi-agent workflows and don't need a library of skills files - I'm writing most of the code and leaning on AI to help with mundane tasks - like; - generating types for APIs - generating boilerplate based…

IMO US vs Chinese data vacuuming is a false choice. One of the main benefits of these open weights models is that you can get the privacy and cost savings by hosting your own model in cloud infrastructure. Open weights models are only 4.5 months behind closed weight ones. The fact that US considers propping its flagship technology by blacklisting competitors demonstrates how small the US competitive advantage really…

Hosting DeepSeek Pro yourself is gonna be wildly expensive though?

You have a wide choice of providers available, so if you can find one you trust you can get inference without data harvesting and it's still very cheap. But dedicated HW is insanely inefficient.

Opus estimates you can do it for $13k/month if you get committed pricing on the HW.

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#524

Post by frm88 »

CPLX wrote: post #67
ceejayoz wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We need a competent industrial policy and support for skilled labor and policies that encourage domestic production. Yes! But "tariff/ban BYD" is not that.

Of course it is part of an industrial policy. It is, however, not nearly sufficient, and if it's the only thing we do, it will become increasingly untenable and eventually fail. But it's an essential first step to prevent our audio industry from just being summarily destroyed. Other steps are also needed to encourage domestic manufacturing and homegrown successes. Also, I'm not sure why this is even controversial. Wh…

Since 2018 ~400 chinese EV producers were allowed to stop operations. An industry that exists because of subsidies and preferential loans as well as state induced trade barriers is not sustainable.

From 2020 onwards, the Chinese government began phasing out its EV subsidy program. This policy shift came just as the country entered a price war, led by aggressive pricing from giants like BYD and Tesla. The combination of reduced state support and brutal price competition proved fatal for many underfunded startups.

https://evboosters.com/ev-charging-news/400-chinese-ev-compa...

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#525

Post by vintermann »

_carbyau_ wrote: post #355
matheusmoreira wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's just my general impression. They banned China from the ISS, China made their own space station. China's making their own x86 chips, their own GPUs. As a fellow wheel reinventer, I admire their audacity. It's the sort of thing that makes me wish my country was like China.

> makes me wish my country was like China I admire their governance ability to have long term plans. The sheer scale of their production ambitions in so many fields and their energy build out is insane. The fact those plans also have subclauses ensuring the party elite are made even more wealthy and powerful is less alluring.

Well, it's not as if there's not an elite enriching and entrenching themselves here either.

Reading about Thiel's "Dialog" meeting, I wonder, do China have their own equivalent of such blatant corruption meetings?

Even if they do, do they discuss "compliance collars" for the security guards in those meetings? I have a feeling they don't.

The future the Chinese elite wants to own, at least seems to include us as something other than a zombie army at the gates of their post apocalyptic bunkers. That's a low bar I know, and not much to be hopeful about, but our elites aren't even meeting it.

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#526

Post by l33tman »

florkbork wrote: post #382
godelski wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 I'm not sure I understand this. I'm not defending the US, but isn't your data being in more hands worse? Also, isn't Australia in a more contentious situation with China? Them being more allied with the US and all? Not to mention the whole nuclear sub issue. Having data stolen is s…

Re Australia vs China https://youtu.be/sgspkxfkS4k?si=JgnhenF0qeTZXeGS basically explains the situation. While having data/code stolen isn't ideal, there is a certain point where you need to assume it's already out there. There's actually more probability of harm from shady US companies imo, because people are less suspicious about data sovereignty

When you paste youtube (or instagram) links, it's good practice to remove the doxxing share link identifiers (?si and everything past it)

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#527

Post by m00dy »

toasty228 wrote: post #266
MaxPock wrote: post #73

Becoming such a sore loser. Historians will probably look this as the most shameful period of the American empire.

> the American empire. When the dust settles it won't even be a single page in history books, my local bakery is older than the "american empire"

do you live in France ? :D

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#528

Post by khalic »

kordlessagain wrote: post #396
azinman2 wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China is already going as hard as they can on their own GPUs. When has availability of non-Chinese tech in China meant China didn't ultimately come up with homegrown replacements?

I saw they have the ASML-type lasers working but are a ways out on getting it to print.

we said the same thing about their home grown GPU datacenter, and look at them now, with multiple facilities 10 years sooner then we thought possible.

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#529

Post by walterbell »

mananaysiempre wrote: post #62

So... anybody who was hoping for CXMT (or YMTC) to maybe cause RAM or flash prices to maybe drop, maybe just a bit, pretty please, can go pound sand? (YMTC of course is already on the Entity List.)

> US. has held off adding.. memory chipmaker CXMT

Since CXMT was _not_ blacklisted, this is good for global RAM supply.

Re: US holds off blacklisting DeepSeek, more than 100 firms deemed security risks

#530

Post by 0xpgm »

glerk wrote: post #309

So 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.

It's likely the elected officials know nothing about AI the technology.

Depends on who has their ears in terms creating policies around technology.

Post reply on HN