Very exciting. Amazing work. The CCP shilling on this board has reached epidemic proportions though, and is shocking to witness.
DeepSeek v4
851–860 of 1001 posts
Re: DeepSeek v4
#852Earlier quoted context omitted.
Still not sure how I feel about China of all places to control the only alternative AI stack, but I guess it's better than leaving everything to the US alone. If China ever feels emboldened enough to go for Taiwan and the US descends into complete chaos, the rest of the world running on AI will be at the mercy of authoritarian regimes. At the very least you can be sure noone is in this for the good of the people anym…
> Still not sure how I feel about China of all places to control the only alternative AI stack, but I guess it's better than leaving everything to the US alone. Fully agree. From a US perspective, that sucks. For everyone else it's pretty great. At this point the world's opinions of China are better than those of the US in some polls. One country invests and helps build infrastructure on a massive scale globally, the…
> Indeed, even if one isn't partial to China, there's reasons to be glad that an increasingly hostile US has powerful competition.
This is how I see it. The US has openly threatened multiple times to annex my country, and has repeatedly threatened every western nation. Letting the US have a monopoly on... well.. anything, is really bad for the world. The more countries that have their own production for various critical things like computer chips, medicine, etc, the better it is for the world at it distributes power.
People in the US don't seem to understand that with the current administration the US is seen as a potentially very hostile nation. While I don't think China is a friend to Canada or the west, at least it provides alternatives when the US tries to use it's monopolies against us. And vice versa too.
>Building a frontier model would be lobbing money into the incinerator for something that will be outdated tomorrow. European investors are too careful for that - and in this case seem to be right.
Strong disagree here. Mistral does great work, in the long term being a few months or even a year behind is a non-issue. Also Cohere just merged with Aleph Alpha to continue producing foundational models. It's extremely important that the middle powers continue to do this.
Re: DeepSeek v4
#853Objective, detailed benchmark results at https://gertlabs.com Early takeaways: from this release, DeepSeek V4 Flash is the model to pay attention to here. It's cheap, effective, and REALLY fast. The Pro model is slow, not much better in coding reasoning so far when it works, and honestly too unreliable and rate limited to be of much use, currently. Hopefully that improves as new providers host the model. Flash is wor…
I would say all benchmarks are inherently subjective. How is yours better? It seems to produce a little bit strange results. Opus 4.6 being worse than 4.5 for example. Or chinese models being rated too high. Kimi, Deepseek or GLM are all great in open source world, but I don't believe they are ahead of SOTA models from Anthropic, OpenAI or Google.
No, some benchmarks are definitely objective, but most can be easily gamed. For example, most of the benchmarks on the model cards: they have measurable answers that don't rely on a human judge (a human made the question, but the answers are measuring some uncontroversial knowledge or capability). But because there is a single, correct answer, and those answer leak (or are randomly discovered and optimized for in training), they lose value over time, and regardless, they have a ceiling on the intelligence they can measure.
Others are purely subjective, like LMArena, which really only measures the personality and style preferences of the masses at this point, because frontier LLM technical answers are too hard for the average person to judge.
Then there are some interesting one-off benchmarks, but they lack enough rigor, breadth, and samples to draw larger conclusions from.
So we designed our benchmark with 3 goals: objective measurements (individual submissions not dependent on a human or LLM judge), no known correct answer (so simulations can scale to much higher levels of intelligence), and enough variety over important aspects of intelligence. We do this by running multiple models in cooperative/competitive environments with very complex action spaces and objective scoring, where model performance is relative and affected by the actions of other participants.
And yeah, there are some interesting results when you have a more objective benchmark. It should raise eyebrows when every single sub-release of every company's model is better across the board than its predecessor -- that isn't reality.
Re: DeepSeek v4
#854Where or how can I use this model with a DPA and better privacy terms? Are there EU friendly hosters already? Would love to use it.
Re: DeepSeek v4
#855The incredible arrogance and hybris of the American initiated tech war - it is just a beautiful thing to see it slowly fall apart. The US-China contest aside - it is in the application layer llms will show their value. There the field, with llm commoditization and no clear monopolies, is wide open. There was a point in time where it looked like llms would the domain of a single well guarded monopoly - that would have…
Still not sure how I feel about China of all places to control the only alternative AI stack, but I guess it's better than leaving everything to the US alone. If China ever feels emboldened enough to go for Taiwan and the US descends into complete chaos, the rest of the world running on AI will be at the mercy of authoritarian regimes. At the very least you can be sure noone is in this for the good of the people anym…
> mercy of authoritarian regimes.
Yet, it's the democratic regime which is causing all the chaos around the world and disrespecting the leadership of other jurisdictions, just to keep pushing the petrol dollar going up.
Do we ever think there's any subtle difference between authoritarian and democratic? Where democracy ultimately makes the world a better place?
Re: DeepSeek v4
#856Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would say all benchmarks are inherently subjective. How is yours better? It seems to produce a little bit strange results. Opus 4.6 being worse than 4.5 for example. Or chinese models being rated too high. Kimi, Deepseek or GLM are all great in open source world, but I don't believe they are ahead of SOTA models from Anthropic, OpenAI or Google.
you are arguing with your belief instead of an objective truth. benchmark is more objective, if you don't agree with it, come up with a better one. but what you believe doesn't matter.
It was not a confrontational take. But all benchmarks are designed by humans, we are not that great at measuring intelligence. So it is somewhat subjective. I was just arguing with the word "objective". Not with the results per se.
Re: DeepSeek v4
#857Re: DeepSeek v4
#858Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would say all benchmarks are inherently subjective. How is yours better? It seems to produce a little bit strange results. Opus 4.6 being worse than 4.5 for example. Or chinese models being rated too high. Kimi, Deepseek or GLM are all great in open source world, but I don't believe they are ahead of SOTA models from Anthropic, OpenAI or Google.
No, some benchmarks are definitely objective, but most can be easily gamed. For example, most of the benchmarks on the model cards: they have measurable answers that don't rely on a human judge (a human made the question, but the answers are measuring some uncontroversial knowledge or capability). But because there is a single, correct answer, and those answer leak (or are randomly discovered and optimized for in tra…
The word "objective" just seems too authoritative to me.
Re: DeepSeek v4
#859The incredible arrogance and hybris of the American initiated tech war - it is just a beautiful thing to see it slowly fall apart. The US-China contest aside - it is in the application layer llms will show their value. There the field, with llm commoditization and no clear monopolies, is wide open. There was a point in time where it looked like llms would the domain of a single well guarded monopoly - that would have…
>- it is just a beautiful thing to see it slowly fall apart. I feel uneasy over China dominance as much as the US. I trust US more still as Europe has a post WW2 relationship. I notice many comments being pro China but they seem to be from the third world (one mentioned a very low salary) I feel the opening of the internet was a mistake. China is a totilitarian dictatorship. This is a fact. Look into Mistral AI too :…
The content we see here is that you are Swedish. I am not sure what sort of moral, technical, financial authority are we supposed to be deriving from this.
Dont get me wrong, Sweden is a cool country, but still my point stands.
Re: DeepSeek v4
#860Where or how can I use this model with a DPA and better privacy terms? Are there EU friendly hosters already? Would love to use it.
> better privacy terms
DeepInfra, as far as I'm aware, doesn't log your prompts and doesn't retain them in most cases, except "debugging purposes". As their per their privacy policy[1]: "We understand that the inputs you provide to our API and the outputs it generates may contain your Personal Information. We will not store, sell, or train using this data unless we have your explicit consent. We might sometimes store, for a limited period of time, the inputs and outputs to API calls for debugging purposes."
They're not EU-based, though. And I'm not sure how "private" their inference actually is. The throughput is also not the best everywhere, sometimes it can be really slow (although right now both DeepSeek-V4 models seem to be doing fine). However, they have a good pricing, probably on of the best on the market.
I'm not affiliated with them in any way, but when I want to test (I'm not a power user of LLMs, chatbots and agents, not at all; I'm doing it just out of the curiosity) something that is too big for my local hardware, DeepInfra is usually being my go-to provider.