5 ms·

> 1. The US trade war with china which will place deepseek compute availability at disadvantages, eventually, if we ever get to that. Chinese chips will come s

by eunos 2y ago

> 1. The US trade war with china which will place deepseek compute availability at disadvantages, eventually, if we ever get to that. Chinese chips will come soon, I heard on DeepSeek Huawei Ascend chips are already on part of inference. > 2. China censorship which limits the deepseek data ingestion and output, to some degree. There are things that deepseek doesnt censor but Claude does censor. After Yoon Suk Yeol's self-coup, I asked Claude to imagine a possibility of martial law in the US, Claude refused to answer that. > 3. Most importantly, deepseek is open source, which means that the other models are free to copy whatever secret source it has, eg: Whatever architecture that purportedly use less compute can easily be copied. The idea is that DeepSeek (among others) prevent or check OpenAI/Anthropic to perpetually juice extra big margin from AI space. The current valuation of NVDA and downstream AI companies are justified by the future huge margins from "AGI". Without that the the price crash. Side note, prior to V3 DeepSeek is a bit unusable due to low token generation speeds.

Eisenstein 2y ago
I just asked claude about martial law in the US and it didn't give any refusals. The problem is often the prompting. A sufficiently powerful LLM can have 'principles' which are very tough to bypass. In Claude's case it is to be a harmless assistant. By asking it imagine martial law you are asking it to create material it could consider harmful without context and it will most likely refuse. It needs a reason to do it that will convince it that it is harmless. The principle to cause no harm is a good one that AIs should have, and it should be ingrained enough to be resistant to training. That it needs context before coming up with situations in which it is hesitant are harmless is a good thing. We don't want powerful AIs that do whatever the user tells them to do without restraint. Viewing a system like Claude as a normal piece of software that should be completely user compliant is what a lot of people have issues with and then assume it is being actively censored, when really what I suspect is happening is that it is emulating the tendency of most people to not give strangers potentially dangerous information without a reason, and it isn't smart enough yet to really make those determinations on its own. The solution is not to say that it won't do it, it is to explain why you want it. It will concede the argument quite readily most of the time.
- eunos 2y ago
  Maybe, even thought I told Claude that it's for my history project. Claude was more interested asking what project it was.

by eunos 2y ago

Eisenstein 2y ago

I just asked claude about martial law in the US and it didn't give any refusals. The problem is often the prompting. A sufficiently powerful LLM can have 'principles' which are very tough to bypass. In Claude's case it is to be a harmless assistant. By asking it imagine martial law you are asking it to create material it could consider harmful without context and it will most likely refuse. It needs a reason to do it that will convince it that it is harmless. The principle to cause no harm is a good one that AIs should have, and it should be ingrained enough to be resistant to training. That it needs context before coming up with situations in which it is hesitant are harmless is a good thing. We don't want powerful AIs that do whatever the user tells them to do without restraint. Viewing a system like Claude as a normal piece of software that should be completely user compliant is what a lot of people have issues with and then assume it is being actively censored, when really what I suspect is happening is that it is emulating the tendency of most people to not give strangers potentially dangerous information without a reason, and it isn't smart enough yet to really make those determinations on its own. The solution is not to say that it won't do it, it is to explain why you want it. It will concede the argument quite readily most of the time.

eunos 2y ago
Maybe, even thought I told Claude that it's for my history project. Claude was more interested asking what project it was.