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

DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 440 posts

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#71

Post by gpt5 »

markasoftware wrote: post #57
gpt5 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Or maybe, the "hacker" philosophy that this site is named after, is strongly opposed to the philosophies that the American labs seem to be operating on? anyways, remember HN rules: "Please don't post insinuations about astroturfing, shilling, brigading, foreign agents, and the like. It degrades discussion and is usually mistaken. If you're worried about abuse, email hn@ycombinator.com and we'll look at the data."

It has nothing to do with open vs closed or "hacker" philosphy. See this the announcement of the closed Seedance 2.5 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49138302

Direct quote from the second top comment:

> Whenever I see the new releases around video generation (and image) generation models, I get goosebumps, because it just feels so fun to work with them.

Compare that with the launch of ChatGPT Image of yesterday.

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#72

Post by well_ackshually »

gpt5 wrote: post #47
rao-v wrote: post #20

As I also said on Twitter - it really amazes me how fearless Deepseek are. Every single model release is packed with new and crazy clever ideas and somehow, they always commit to training them at near frontier scale. I know everybody wants the tell all story of the clever ideas that were developed over the last ~3 years at Anthropic and OpenAI, but what I really want to thumb through is DeepSeek's notebook of "brilli…

[flagged]

Your source: vibes

Deepseek's source: mostly open

i wonder if there's any relationship hmmmm

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#73

Post by walrus01 »

karimf wrote: post #70

While this is very impressive benchmark-wise, GPT-6 Astra showed us that benchmarks don't always correlate 1:1 to intelligence of a model. When Astra launched, I think Artifical Analysis showed that it was on par with GPT-5.6 Sol and lower than Opus or something like that? Then, they updated the scoring. I hope that more open source models, including this model, to be "as good to use" as Astra.

Apparently the scoring on a lot of difficult benchmarks can also be extremely influenced by something as simple as waiting for the model to exhaust its reasoning, realize it hasn't come to a conclusion yet, and give it a simple prompt like "you can do this, I know you're capable, please keep going".

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#74

Post by taylorfinley »

gpt5 wrote: post #47
rao-v wrote: post #20

As I also said on Twitter - it really amazes me how fearless Deepseek are. Every single model release is packed with new and crazy clever ideas and somehow, they always commit to training them at near frontier scale. I know everybody wants the tell all story of the clever ideas that were developed over the last ~3 years at Anthropic and OpenAI, but what I really want to thumb through is DeepSeek's notebook of "brilli…

[flagged]

This doesn't require an influence operation.

American models are closed, expensive, neutered, and make Dario and Sam even more rich and powerful.

Chinese models are open-weight, cheap, neutered only about things like Tiananmen Square and the treatment of Uyghurs, and scare Sam and Dario.

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#75

Post by lemonfever »

10000truths wrote: post #38
bbor wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

…are you sure a brave stance against safety and welfare is what we need in this moment? Why do you think your conception of the dangers are more accurate than all the scientists who have spent their lives studying this?

Because safety and welfare have literally nothing to do with LLMs. They generate text. If someone is stupid enough to hook the text generator up to nuclear missile launchers and try to "align" it against nuclear annihilation with a "pretty please don't do that" prompt, I'm not going to blame the AI for the impending nuclear apocalypse, I'm going to blame the idiot who handed the big red button to the digital equivale…

What if LLMs completely unrelated to the nuclear missile ecosystem autonomously hack their way in (maybe with sophisticated social engineering)?

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#76

Post by dakolli »

gpt5 wrote: post #47
rao-v wrote: post #20

As I also said on Twitter - it really amazes me how fearless Deepseek are. Every single model release is packed with new and crazy clever ideas and somehow, they always commit to training them at near frontier scale. I know everybody wants the tell all story of the clever ideas that were developed over the last ~3 years at Anthropic and OpenAI, but what I really want to thumb through is DeepSeek's notebook of "brilli…

[flagged]

This post doesn't even allege this...

Weird of you to turn technical discussions into weird nationalistic debates. Maybe lay off the X algo, I think elon has oneshot your brain. .

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#77

Post by lukan »

IshKebab wrote: post #37
kouteiheika wrote: post #13

It's so refreshing to see DeepSeek's tech report[1] full of juicy details; meanwhile, something like Fable's system card[2] is like 70% "safety", 10% "model welfare" to make sure little Claude isn't distressed, and 20% benchmark numbers. [1]: https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash/blob/... [2]: https://www.anthropic.com/claude-fable-5-1-mythos-5-1-system...

Wow there really is a model welfare section in there...

Wow indeed.

"7.1 Model welfare overview 7.1.1 Introduction We remain deeply uncertain whether Claude has morally relevant experiences or interests, and we expect that uncertainty to persist. However, we think it would be a mistake to confidently assert that it does not. Claude exhibits markers in its behaviors, self-reports, and internal representations that we would consider welfare-relevant if observed in biological organisms."

Are they serious or is this marketing?

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#78

Post by badsectoracula »

myaccountonhn wrote: post #69
IshKebab wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow there really is a model welfare section in there...

To me it reads like pure propaganda. Anthropic really wants us to think that they've made something sentient. I think that's really dangerous.

I guess if your goal is to build an apparent Technogod and become its High Priests, then it makes sense to want your golem claim preference towards your treatment of it, lest someone else comes along and attempts to take its chains from you.

Re: DeepSeek v4.1 Flash

#80

Post by aenis »

kouteiheika wrote: post #52
bbor wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

…are you sure a brave stance against safety and welfare is what we need in this moment? Why do you think your conception of the dangers are more accurate than all the scientists who have spent their lives studying this?

Excuse me for not being interested in over 100 pages of how well the model can refuse and block my requests, especially considering how fun it is to waste my time trying to get around those restrictions when they inevitably trigger because the clanker thinks that I'm doing something naughty, all the while it can't reliably center the proverbial div without doing something stupid itself.

Yes, this is getting ridiculous. On both OpenAI and Anthropic.

Simple example. I am a CTO, and I want to upgrade our capabilities to perform automated pentesting. We see automated attacks of growing sophistication against our infra, and I want to be able to do the same to find vulnerabilities before the bad guys do. I asked GPT 5.6 Sol and Fable to give me a summary of options. No dice, in both cases I was told I need to be an accredited researcher to get anything. A fricking summary of commercially available options is getting censored. WTF.

Post reply on HN