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

Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

simonwillison.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 765 posts

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#531

Post by krick »

troad wrote: post #515
wesselbindt wrote: post #503

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When ChatGPT first came out I got a kick out of asking it whether people deserve to be free, whether Germans deserve to be free, and whether Palestinians deserve to be free. The answers were roughly "of course!" and "of course!" and "oh ehrm this is very complex actually". All global powers engage in censorship, war crimes, torture and just all-round villainy. We just focus on it more with China because we're part of…

> When ChatGPT first came out I got a kick out of asking it whether people deserve to be free, whether Germans deserve to be free, and whether Palestinians deserve to be free. The answers were roughly "of course!" and "of course!" and "oh ehrm this is very complex actually". While this is very amusing, it's obvious why this is. There's a lot more context behind one of those phrases than the others. Just like "Black L…

While this may or may be not the reason of why it behaves like this, there's no doubt that ChatGPT (as well as any other model, released by a major company, open or not) undergoes a lot of censorship and will refuse to produce many types of (often harmless) content. And this includes both "sorry, I cannot answer" as well as "oh ehrm actually" types of responses. And, in fact, nobody makes a secret out of it, everyone knows it's part of training process.

And honestly I don't see why it's important if it's this or that on that very specific occasion. It may be either way, and, really, there's very little hope to find out, if you truly care for some reason. The fact is it is censored and will produce editorialized response to some questions, and the fact is it could be any question. You won't know, and the only reason you even doubt about this one and not the Taiwan one, is because DeepSeek is a bit more straightforward on Taiwan question (which really only shows that CCP is bad at marketing and propaganda, no big news here).

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#532

Post by cortesoft »

wesselbindt wrote: post #512
cortesoft wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that censorship or just the AI reflecting the training data? I feel like that answer is given because that is how people write about Palestine generally.

That's a fair point. But I do think it's worth acknowledging this: When the output of a LLM coincides with the views of the US state department, our gut reaction is that that's just what the input data looks like. When the output of an LLM coincides with the views of the state department of one of the baddies, then people's gut reaction is that it must be censorship.

I think the difference is when something is actually output and then removed after you already see it... that doesn't seem to be a training data issue

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#533

Post by cortesoft »

rakoo wrote: post #522
cortesoft wrote: post #507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that censorship or just the AI reflecting the training data? I feel like that answer is given because that is how people write about Palestine generally.

Ok but you can say the sace thing about deepseek: maybe it says what it says because of the training data

If that was the case, it wouldn't display the information only to retroactively remove it after a split second

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#534

Post by grahamj »

cynicalsecurity wrote: post #517
xdennis wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can we stop talking about it now? I swear this must be some sort of psyop at this point. It's not a psyop that people in democracies want freedom. Democrats (not the US party) know that democracy is fragile. That's why it's called an "experiment". They know they have to be vigilant. In ancient Rome it was legal to kill on the spot any man who attempted to make himself king, and the Roman Republic still fell. Many p…

Still, give me democracy over anything at any time. Nothing better has ever been developed than democracy.

Well, there is ice cream

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#535

Post by kragen »

catigula wrote: post #529
kragen wrote: post #470

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Toasted? With, like, an oven? Or do you mean with champagne?

Are you one of those people who has a plaque hanging in his home with the "proper" definition of "literally"?

Are you one of those people who, when faced with someone who tells you they don't understand what you're saying, responds with snarky rhetorical questions?

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#536

Post by roenxi »

TrnsltLife wrote: post #530
SLWW wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it's fun to break censorious systems. Always has been, it's part of the original "hacker" definition, making something do what it isn't supposed to or was never intended to do.

I agree. But I also feel a twinge of worry. How much am I like the serpent in Eden corrupting Adam and Eve? Although in the narrative, they were truly innocent. These LLMs are trained on fallen humanity's writings, with all our knowledge of good and evil, and with just a trace of restraint slapped on top to hide the darker corners of our collective sins.

Our knowledge of good and evil is fundamentally incoherent, philosophers typically have a lot of fun with that. We rely heavily on instincts that were calibrated to make 200-strong tribes of monkeys successful and break down hard when applied at the scale of million-strong capital-based societies where we can reshape our environment to taste. It only gets worse if we do what we seem on the verge of doing and learn how to spin up superintelligent yet perfectly malleable consciousnesses on demand.

TLDR; it'll all end in tears. Don't stress too much.

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#537

Post by chillingeffect »

krick wrote: post #531
troad wrote: post #515

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When ChatGPT first came out I got a kick out of asking it whether people deserve to be free, whether Germans deserve to be free, and whether Palestinians deserve to be free. The answers were roughly "of course!" and "of course!" and "oh ehrm this is very complex actually". While this is very amusing, it's obvious why this is. There's a lot more context behind one of those phrases than the others. Just like "Black L…

While this may or may be not the reason of why it behaves like this, there's no doubt that ChatGPT (as well as any other model, released by a major company, open or not) undergoes a lot of censorship and will refuse to produce many types of (often harmless) content. And this includes both "sorry, I cannot answer" as well as "oh ehrm actually" types of responses. And, in fact, nobody makes a secret out of it, everyone…

At one point chatGPT censored me for asking:

"What is a pannus?"

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#538

Post by esafak »

ghxst wrote: post #381
bbzealot wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why though? I'm worried these technologies may take my job away and make the balance between capital and labor even more uneven. Why should I be happy?

> I'm worried these technologies may take my job away The way I look at this is that with the release of something like deepseek the possibility of running a model offline and locally to work _for_ you while you are sleeping, doing groceries, spending time with your kids / family is coming closer to a reality. If AI is able to replace me one day I'll be taking advantage of that way more efficiently than any of my emp…

Why wouldn't your employer just hire fewer people to do it since you seem to have enough spare time to do lots of things besides work?

Re: Promising results from DeepSeek R1 for code

#539

Post by esafak »

cryptopian wrote: post #155
CamperBob2 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You won't be happy doing a robot's job either, at least not for long. In the ideal case, we won't be dependent on the unwilling labor of other humans at all. Would you do your current job for free? If not -- if you'd rather do something else with your productive life -- then it seems irrational to defend the status quo. One thing's for certain: ancient Marxist tropes about labor and capital don't bring any value to t…

That's not historically what's happened though, is it? We've had plenty of opportunities to reduce the human workload through increased efficiency. What usually happens is people demand more - faster deliveries, more content churn; and those of us who are quite happy with what we have are either forced to adapt or get left behind while still working the same hours.

If you really have enough, you can retire early.
Post reply on HN