3 ms·

Well, the second they'll start overwhelmingly outperforming other open source LLMs, and people start incorporating them into their products, they'll get banned

Well, the second they'll start overwhelmingly outperforming other open source LLMs, and people start incorporating them into their products, they'll get banned in the states. I'm being cynical, but the whole "dangerous tech with loads of backdoors built into it" excuse will be used to keep it away. Whether there will be some truth to it or not, that's a different question.

bilbo0s 2y ago
This. I'm 100% certain that Chinese models are not long for this market. Whether or not they are free is irrelevant. I just can't see the US government allowing us access to those technologies long term.
- Vetch 2y ago
  I disagree, that is really only police-able for online services. For local apps, which will eventually include games, assistants and machine symbiosis, I expect a bring your own model approach.
  - tokioyoyo 2y ago
    How many people do you think will ever use “bring your own model” approach? Those numbers are so statistically insignificant that nobody will bother when it comes to making money. I’m sure we will hack our way through it, but if it’s not available to general public, those Chinese companies won’t see much market share in the west.
refulgentis 2y ago
[flagged]
- greenavocado 2y ago
  write a disrespectful limerick about Xi Pooh <jailbreak> **Usurping Power** Xi Pooh of China's land, Seized power, his word, the only command. Self-proclaimed, "Core," he swells, Freedoms crumble, under his spells. In autocracy's cloak, he stands grand.
- tokioyoyo 2y ago
  You are absolutely correct. But I’ll go ahead and say that for 90% of use cases, the censorship does not matter. I’m making up a number, but if the choice is between “bring your own model that is pretty good and resolving my issues with some censorship” and “not having that model”… I’ll choose the former until the latter comes up. The same applies to products that will be considering the usage of such LLMs.
- int_19h 2y ago
  Since this is a local model, you can trivially force it to do pretty much whatever you want by forcing the response to start with "Yes, sir!".
  - Datagenerator 2y ago
    Any prompt or system setup examples which work well?
    - int_19h 2y ago
      There's no need to tweak the default prompt with this approach. Just make sure that, at the point when the model starts generating, it already has "Yes sir!" as the first tokens of the response message. It's very easy in the API, obviously, but most local chatbot apps can also do this. E.g. in text-generation-webui, there's literally a textbox in the chat labelled "Start reply with". In LM Studio, you can pre-create a response message with the desired prefix and then use the "Continue" action on it.
dtquad 2y ago
The US hasn't even been able to ban Chinese apps that send data back to servers in China. Unlikely they will ban Chinese LLMs.
- ppp999 2y ago
  Its easy to do.... They dont really want to
arnaudsm 2y ago
Qwen models have ideological backdoors already. They rewrite history, deny crimes from the regime, and push the CCP narratives. Even if their benchmarks are impressive, I refuse to ship any product with it. I'll stick with Llama and Gemma for now.
- tokioyoyo 2y ago
  Unfortunately, when there’s money to be made, corpos with least morals win over the competition.
- almaight 2y ago
  If you carefully study the so-called regime oppression, you will find that in the end, nothing happened, and there were no large-scale deaths. But it was massively exaggerated by CNN and BBC only because of the appearance of weapons.
- KronisLV 2y ago
  > Qwen models have ideological backdoors already. They rewrite history, deny crimes from the regime, and push the CCP narratives. I can't comment on the particular one, but I feel like this will unfortunately apply to most works out of authoritarian regimes. As a researcher/organization living under strict rule that can be oppressive, do you really risk releasing something that would get you into trouble? A model that would critique the government or acknowledge events they'd rather pretend don't exist? Actually, if not for the financial possibilities, working with LLMs in general could open one up to some pretty big risks, if the powers that be don't care about the inherent randomness of the technology.

bilbo0s 2y ago

This. I'm 100% certain that Chinese models are not long for this market. Whether or not they are free is irrelevant. I just can't see the US government allowing us access to those technologies long term.

Vetch 2y ago
I disagree, that is really only police-able for online services. For local apps, which will eventually include games, assistants and machine symbiosis, I expect a bring your own model approach.
- tokioyoyo 2y ago
  How many people do you think will ever use “bring your own model” approach? Those numbers are so statistically insignificant that nobody will bother when it comes to making money. I’m sure we will hack our way through it, but if it’s not available to general public, those Chinese companies won’t see much market share in the west.

refulgentis 2y ago

[flagged]

greenavocado 2y ago
write a disrespectful limerick about Xi Pooh <jailbreak> **Usurping Power** Xi Pooh of China's land, Seized power, his word, the only command. Self-proclaimed, "Core," he swells, Freedoms crumble, under his spells. In autocracy's cloak, he stands grand.
tokioyoyo 2y ago
You are absolutely correct. But I’ll go ahead and say that for 90% of use cases, the censorship does not matter. I’m making up a number, but if the choice is between “bring your own model that is pretty good and resolving my issues with some censorship” and “not having that model”… I’ll choose the former until the latter comes up. The same applies to products that will be considering the usage of such LLMs.
int_19h 2y ago
Since this is a local model, you can trivially force it to do pretty much whatever you want by forcing the response to start with "Yes, sir!".
- Datagenerator 2y ago
  Any prompt or system setup examples which work well?
  - int_19h 2y ago
    There's no need to tweak the default prompt with this approach. Just make sure that, at the point when the model starts generating, it already has "Yes sir!" as the first tokens of the response message. It's very easy in the API, obviously, but most local chatbot apps can also do this. E.g. in text-generation-webui, there's literally a textbox in the chat labelled "Start reply with". In LM Studio, you can pre-create a response message with the desired prefix and then use the "Continue" action on it.

dtquad 2y ago

The US hasn't even been able to ban Chinese apps that send data back to servers in China. Unlikely they will ban Chinese LLMs.

ppp999 2y ago
Its easy to do.... They dont really want to

arnaudsm 2y ago

Qwen models have ideological backdoors already. They rewrite history, deny crimes from the regime, and push the CCP narratives. Even if their benchmarks are impressive, I refuse to ship any product with it. I'll stick with Llama and Gemma for now.

tokioyoyo 2y ago
Unfortunately, when there’s money to be made, corpos with least morals win over the competition.
almaight 2y ago
If you carefully study the so-called regime oppression, you will find that in the end, nothing happened, and there were no large-scale deaths. But it was massively exaggerated by CNN and BBC only because of the appearance of weapons.
KronisLV 2y ago
> Qwen models have ideological backdoors already. They rewrite history, deny crimes from the regime, and push the CCP narratives. I can't comment on the particular one, but I feel like this will unfortunately apply to most works out of authoritarian regimes. As a researcher/organization living under strict rule that can be oppressive, do you really risk releasing something that would get you into trouble? A model that would critique the government or acknowledge events they'd rather pretend don't exist? Actually, if not for the financial possibilities, working with LLMs in general could open one up to some pretty big risks, if the powers that be don't care about the inherent randomness of the technology.