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

601–610 of 633 posts

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

#601

Post by wat10000 »

teravor wrote: post #597
wat10000 wrote: post #593

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what you mean. I assumed the scenario was the manufacturer bricking the car, starting it on fire, or making it crash. Bricking is pretty obviously trivial. Starting it on fire would require changes to the battery, motor, or charger firmware, no big deal. Making it crash requires control over steering, motor, and brakes, which any car with modern driver assist features already has. What part of this…

> What part of this would a Tesla, or any other car, not be able to do? Tesla computers are not capable of maintaining steering control when the user is physically moving the steering wheel. does BYD have similar restrictions? can you trust them? this discussion has reached the limit of its usefulness. if you aren't able to see why having nationals in an adversary nation be in control of dangerous hardware on your so…

That's not the point of disagreement. I completely see why that's a big problem. Where we disagree is the notion that Volvo isn't controlled by an adversary nation or doesn't have dangerous hardware.

If you've managed to come away from this discussion with the impression that I think it's no big deal to have adversaries in control of dangerous hardware on your soil, then I do have to agree that this discussion has reached the limit of its usefulness, because I said nothing of the kind.

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

#602

Post by LtWorf »

godelski wrote: post #585
LtWorf wrote: post #532

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you think by voting for the other person AI companies and USA government wouldn't misuse all the data they hoard?

Why do you think I like them or support those actions? Do you support everything the Klingon Empire does? That doesn't seem like the Worf I know. The Worf I know can distinguish the people of a civilization from the leaders of their societies. To conflate them just creates the problems you are criticizing

The klingon empire isn't a democracy, we don't delude ourselves that simply swapping one single person would have made a difference.

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

#603

Post by _heimdall »

inigyou wrote: post #432
_heimdall wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The definition matters for sure. IMO, markets (like speech) are either free or they aren't. We have a lot of government intervention in markets today. From subsidies to tax incentives to regulations and import tariffs, markets are much more controlled than it seems on the surface.

A free market can't exist without heavy government interference (property rights to start with) but not all markers with heavy government interference are free, either

Market regulation and protection of property rights are quite different though. Protecting rights agreed upon by a strong majority of the population isn't really heavy government intervention in my opinion.

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

#604

Post by inigyou »

hereme888 wrote: post #552
inigyou wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe people want to be able to sleep? How the fuck did the AI bubble industry manage to take one of the cleanest industries and make it dirty again?

That's precisely the CCP brainwashing: the data centers in question were actually VERY clean, and would give the communities a ton of jobs. This happens all the time for people with agendas: pollution fear mongering for projects that are actually super clean and useful. Seen it happen in real life, many times.

Why are there audio recordings of them being very loud?

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

#605

Post by inigyou »

WarmWash wrote: post #556
inigyou wrote: post #443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh no! A group of people doing useful and good things to increase their reputation! That's terrible! But seriously, if it works so well, why don't we do it too?

Because the US is a democracy and there is blowback for pissing off the public. So allocating hundred of billions of taxpayer money to AI would be enormously unpopular. We have private markets that can spend their money however they chose. China just has the state with one leader than thats it.

But the US did allocate hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars to AI...

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

#606

Post by inigyou »

ge96 wrote: post #570
inigyou wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well they don't, and nobody has any idea how to build that, so why even mention it

It is being worked on this is just a random paper I pulled but yeah https://arxiv.org/html/2502.01013v1 few of em actually https://openreview.net/forum?id=PGNff6H1TV

fully homomorphic encryption is a theoretical thing that runs a billion times slower than running the code normally, to make that more clear, it takes a year to run a millisecond's computation.

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

#607

Post by inigyou »

_heimdall wrote: post #603
inigyou wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A free market can't exist without heavy government interference (property rights to start with) but not all markers with heavy government interference are free, either

Market regulation and protection of property rights are quite different though. Protecting rights agreed upon by a strong majority of the population isn't really heavy government intervention in my opinion.

They're literally the exact same thing.

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

#608

Post by godelski »

LtWorf wrote: post #602
godelski wrote: post #585

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think I like them or support those actions? Do you support everything the Klingon Empire does? That doesn't seem like the Worf I know. The Worf I know can distinguish the people of a civilization from the leaders of their societies. To conflate them just creates the problems you are criticizing

The klingon empire isn't a democracy, we don't delude ourselves that simply swapping one single person would have made a difference.

The same fact is true in a democracy. A democracy specifically is set up so just a single person doesn't rule. That's called a dictatorship.

But you turn a democracy into a dictatorship through tribalism. So forgive me if I get mad at you trying to place me into a nice well defined box. You're helping erode the democracy I (and so many others) desperately want to maintain (and improve).

What would Worf do?

I'm certain he wouldn't have done what you did

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

#609

Post by hsuduebc2 »

sinuhe69 wrote: post #478
hsuduebc2 wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm interested if this is a tactic from Chinese side to undermine competition by subsidizing this price dumping.

How it’s price dumping if they give you the model to run free on your own hardware? Follow this logic, are not all OSS price dumping and should be blocked as well? I remember Steve Ballmer once called for that! I’m pretty sure the digital lords like that proposal a lot. Not so much about the serfs themselves, though.

First of all you are assuming I'm saying they should block it. I'm not.

Seconddly, releasing the model weights for free and selling hosted inference are completely different markets. Open source itself is not price dumping obviously. But a hosted API can still be dumped if it is sold below cost to buy market share or squeeze competitors. Which it is.

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

#610

Post by guywithahat »

ascorbic wrote: post #496
guywithahat wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing wrong with the US buying greenland, which has been done for territories around the world? The US has a long history of protecting individual freedoms, China does not. There's an irony that you're aware of the misgivings of the US because we have free speech protections. You're probably less aware of the misgivings of the EU because they regularly arrest citizens for speech, and no awareness of the iss…

You're kinda missing the important bit there: buying Greenland under threat of invasion

I think you're kind of missing the important bit; there is no threat of invasion and there never has been. People just want reasons to be mad at Trump, and so they make things up
Post reply on HN