11 ms·

For those who haven't realized it yet, Deepseek-R1 is better than claude 3.5 and better than OpenAI o1-pro, better than Gemini. It is simply smarter -- a lot l

For those who haven't realized it yet, Deepseek-R1 is better than claude 3.5 and better than OpenAI o1-pro, better than Gemini. It is simply smarter -- a lot less stupid, more careful, more astute, more aware, more meta-aware, etc. We know that Anthropic and OpenAI and Meta are panicking. They should be. The bar is a lot higher now. The justification for keeping the sauce secret just seems a lot more absurd. None of the top secret sauce that those companies have been hyping up is worth anything now that there is a superior open source model. Let that sink in. This is real competition. If we can't have it in EVs at least we can have it in AI models!

rapsey 2y ago
The nVidia market price could also be questionable considering how much cheaper DS is to run.
- resters 2y ago
  It should be. I think AMD has left a lot on the table with respect to competing in the space (probably to the point of executive negligence) and the new US laws will help create several new Chinese competitors. NVIDIA probably has a bit of time left as the market leader, but it's really due mostly to luck.
  - llm_trw 2y ago
    As we have seen here it won't be a Western company that saves us from the dominant monopoly. Xi Jinping, you're our only hope.
    - logicchains 2y ago
      If China really released a GPU competitive with the current generation of nvidia you can bet it'd be banned in the US like BYD and DJI.
      - resters 2y ago
        Sad but likely true.
      - rapsey 2y ago
        Ok but that leaves the rest of the world to China.
        BonoboIO 2y ago
        Out of nowhere … Europe!
      - IncreasePosts 2y ago
        DJI isn't banned in the US?
  - SecretDreams 2y ago
    > NVIDIA probably has a bit of time left as the market leader, but it's really due mostly to luck. Look, I think NVIDIA is overvalued and AI hype has poisoned markets/valuations quite a bit. But if I set that aside, I can't actually say NVIDIA is in the position they're in due to luck. Jensen has seemingly been executing against a cohesive vision for a very long time. And focused early on on the software side of the business to make actually using the GPUs easier. The only luck is that LLMs became popular.. but I would say consistent execution at NVIDIA is why they are the most used solution today.
    - epolanski 2y ago
      > I can't actually say NVIDIA is in the position they're in due to luck They aren't, end of story. Even though I'm not a scientist in the space, I studied at EPFL in 2013 and researchers in the ML space could write to Nvidia about their research with their university email and Nvidia would send top-tier hardware for free. Nvidia has funded, invested and supported in the ML space when nobody was looking and it's only natural that the research labs ended up writing tools around its hardware. I don't think their moat will hold forever, especially among big tech that has the resources to optimize around their use case but it's only natural they enjoy such a headstart.
      - resters 2y ago
        I agree with all of your data points. NVIDIA was lucky that AMD didn't do any of that stuff and sat out of the professional GPU market when it actually had significant advantages it could have employed.
      - SecretDreams 2y ago
        Totally agreed.
- saagarjha 2y ago
  Deepseek has thousands of Nvidia GPUs, though.
- RavlaAlvar 2y ago
  The improved efficiency of steam engines in the past did not reduce coal consumption; instead, it enabled people to accomplish more work with the same resource.
- Deegy 2y ago
  I thought so at first too, but then realized this may actually unlock more total demand for them.
- ExtraEmpathy 2y ago
  [dead]
loveparade 2y ago
There has never been much secret sauce in the model itself. The secret sauce or competitive advantage has always been in the engineering that goes into the data collection, model training infrastructure, and lifecycle/debugging management of model training. As well as in the access to GPUs. Yeah, with Deepseek the barrier to entry has become significantly lower now. That's good, and hopefully more competition will come. But it's not like it's a fundamental change of where the secret sauce is.
- llm_trw 2y ago
  The word you're looking for is copyright enfrignment. That's the secret sause that every good model uses.
  - resters 2y ago
    True, and likely lots of other data that should not have been used to train a model. It is at this point hard to imagine a model that is good at reasoning that doesn't also have vast implicit "knowledge".
  - silverliver 2y ago
    Humanity keeps running into copyright issues with every major leap in IT technology (photocopiers, tape cassettes, personal computers, internet, and now AI). I think it's about time for humanity to rethink their take on the unnatural restriction of information. I personally hope that countries recognize copyright and patents for what they really are and abolish them. Countries that refuse to do so can play catch up.
    - Mi2ko3 2y ago
      This is based on a flawed view of how we humans behave. Without incentive no effort. This is also the reason why socialism has and always will fail. People who put massive effort in creating original content need to be able to earn the rewards.
      - 2y ago
bboygravity 2y ago
I must be missing something, but I tried Deepseek R1 via Kagi assistant and IMO it doesn't even come close to Claude? I don't get the hype at all? What am I doing wrong? And of course if you ask it anything related to the CCP it will suddenly turn into a Pinokkio simulator.
- resters 2y ago
  I haven't tried kagi assistant, but try it at deepseek.com. All models at this point have various politically motivated filters. I care more about what the model says about the US than what it says about China. Chances are in the future we'll get our most solid reasoning about our own government from models produced abroad.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - bboygravity 2y ago
    deepseek.com --> 500 Internal Server Error nginx/1.18.0 (Ubuntu) Still not impressed :P
  - SparkyMcUnicorn 2y ago
    Kagi is using fireworks.ai according to the docs, which is the 685B model. Kagi and Aider benchmarks definitely put R1 in the lead, but I have yet to try them out.
  - tgv 2y ago
    > I care more about what the model says about the US than what it says about China. This I don't get. If you want to use an LLM to take some of the work off your hands, I get it. But to ask an LLM for a political opinion?
    - monsieurbanana 2y ago
digitcatphd 2y ago
Nah, this just means training isn’t the advantage. There’s plenty to be had by focusing on inference. It’s like saying apple is dead because back in 1987 there was a cheaper and faster PC offshore. I sure hope so otherwise this is a pretty big moment to question life goals.
- sdesol 2y ago
  > saying apple is dead because back in 1987 there was a cheaper and faster PC offshore What Apple did was build a luxury brand and I don't see that happening with LLMs. When it comes to luxury, you really can't compete with price.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - have_faith 2y ago
    Apple isn’t a luxury brand in the normal sense, it’s odd that people think this because they’re more expensive. They’re not the technical equivalent of Prada or Rolex etc. Apple’s ecosystem cohesion and still unmatched UX (still flawed) is a real value-add that normal luxury brands don’t have.
    - mikaraento 2y ago
      So maybe not luxury, but premium. Like MB or Audi in cars. Pricing still plays out differently.
just-ok 2y ago
It’s not better than o1. And given that OpenAI is on the verge of releasing o3, has some “o4” in the pipeline, and Deepseek could only build this because of o1, I don’t think there’s as much competition as people seem to imply. I’m excited to see models become open, but given the curve of progress we’ve seen, even being “a little” behind is a gap that grows exponentially every day.
- Mond_ 2y ago
  > Deepseek could only build this because of o1, I don’t think there’s as much competition as people seem to imply And this is based on what exactly? OpenAI hides the reasoning steps, so training a model on o1 is very likely much more expensive (and much less useful) than just training it directly on a cheaper model.
  - karmasimida 2y ago
    Because literally before o1, no one is doing COT style test time scaling. It is a new paradigm. The talking point back then, is the LLM hits the wall. R1's biggest contribution IMO, is R1-Zero, I am fully sold with this they don't need o1's output to be as good. But yeah, o1 is still the herald.
    - Mond_ 2y ago
      I don't think Chain of Thought in itself was a particularly big deal, honestly. It always seemed like the most obvious way to make AI "work". Just give it some time to think to itself, and then summarize and conclude based on its own responses. Like, this idea always seemed completely obvious to me, and I figured the only reason why it hadn't been done yet is just because (at the time) models weren't good enough. (So it just caused them to get confused, and it didn't improve results.) Presumably OpenAI were the first to claim this achievement because they had (at the time) the strongest model (+ enough compute). That doesn't mean COT was a revolutionary idea, because imo it really wasn't. (Again, it was just a matter of having a strong enough model, enough context, enough compute for it to actually work. That's not an academic achievement, just a scaling victory.)
karmasimida 2y ago
Which is simply not true O1 pro is still better, I have both. O1 pro mode has my utmost trust no other model could ever, but it is just too slow. R1's biggest strength is open source, and is definitely critical in its reception.
- resters 2y ago
  > O1 pro is still better I thought that too until I actually used it extensively. o1-pro is great and I am not planning to cancel my subscription, but deepseek is figuring things out that tend to stump o1-pro or lead it to get confused/forgetful.
cft 2y ago
Here Deepseek r1 fixes a python bug. Its fix is the same as the original code. I have not seen that level of stupidity from o1 or sonnet 3.5 https://x.com/alecm3/status/1883147247485170072?t=55xwg97roj74RglY2Dil_g&s=19 https://x.com/alecm3/status/1883147247485170072?t=55xwg97roj...
- hatefulmoron 2y ago
  I'm not commenting on what's better, but I've definitely seen that from Sonnet a few times.
hmottestad 2y ago
I tried two questions that I had recently asked o1 pro mode. The first was about setting up a GitHub action to build a Hugo website. I provided it with the config code, and asked it about setting the directory to build from. It messed this up big time and decided that I should actually be checking out the git repo to that directory instead. I can see in the thinking section that it’s actually thought of the right solution, but just couldn’t execute on those thoughts. O1 pro mode got this on the first try. Also tried a Java question about using SIMD to compare two CharSequence objects. This was a bit hit or miss. O1 didn’t do great either. R1 actually saw that it’s possible to convert a char array to a short vector, which was better than o1, but they both failed to understand that I don’t have a char array. Also tried a maven build problem I had the other day. O1 managed to figure that one out, and R1 also managed on the first go but was better at explaining what I should do to fix the issue.
- F7F7F7 2y ago
  I’ve had the exact opposite experience. But mine was in using both models to propose and ultimately write a refactor. If you don’t get this type of thing on the first shot with o1 pro you’re better off opening up a new chat, refining your prompt, and trying again. Soon as your asks get smaller within this much larger context I find it gets lost and starts being inconsistent in its answers. Even when the task remains the same as the initial prompt it starts coming up with newer more novel solutions halfway through implementation. R1 seems much more up to the task of handling its large context window and remaining consistent. The search experience is also a lot better than search capable OpenAI models. It doesn’t get as stuck in a search response template and can answer questions in consideration of it.
rz2k 2y ago
I don't get it. I like DeepSeek, because I can turn on Search button. Turning on Deepthink R1 makes the results as bad as Perplexity. The results make me feel like they used parallel construction, and that the straightforward replies would have actually had some value. Claude Sonnet 3."6" may be limited in rare situations, but its personality really makes the responses outperform everything else when you're trying to take a deep dive into a subject where you previously knew nothing. I think that the "thinking" part is a fiction, but it would be pretty cool if it gave you the thought process, and you could edit it. Often with these reasoning models like DeepSeek R1, the overview of the research strategy is nuts for the problem domain.
- resters 2y ago
  IMO the deep think button works wonders.
  - FridgeSeal 2y ago
    Whenever I use it, it just seems to spin itself in circles for ages, spit out a half-assed summary and give up. Is it like the OpenAI models in that in needs to be prompted in extremely-specific ways to get it to not be garbage?
    - resters 2y ago
      I'm curious what you are asking it to do and whether you think the thoughts it expresses along the seemed likely to lead it in a useful direction before it resorted to a summary. Also perhaps it doesn't realize you don't want a summary?
      - TechDebtDevin 2y ago
        People be like, "please provide me with a full stack web app" and then think its bad when it doesnt.
    - hmottestad 2y ago
      O1 doesn’t seem to need any particularly specific prompts. It seems to work just fine on just about anything I give it. It’s still not fantastic, but often times it comes up with things I either would have had to spend a lot of time to get right or just plainly things I didn’t know about myself.
mrtksn 2y ago
Funny, maybe OpenAI will achieve their initial stated goals of propelling AI research, spend investors money and be none profit. Functionally the same as their non-profit origins.
- karmasimida 2y ago
  > non-profits Not by themselves but by the competitors The irony loll o3/o4 better be real magic otherwise I don't see the they get their mojo back
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- nyclounge 2y ago
  >Funny, maybe OpenAI will achieve their initial stated goals of propelling AI research, spend investors money and be none profit. Functionally the same as their non-profit origins. Serves them right!!! This hopefully will give any non-profit pulling an OpenAI in going for-profit a second thought!!!! If you wanna go for-profit it is fine, just say it! Don't get the good will of community going and then do a bait and switch.
mr_world 2y ago
I honestly can't tell if this is a bot post because of just how bad I find Deepseek R1 to be. When asking it complex questions based on an app I'm working on, it always gives a flawed response that breaks the program. Where Claude is sometimes wrong, but not consistently wrong and completely missing the point of the question like Deepseek R1 100% is. Claude I can work with, Deepseek is trash. I've had no luck with it at all and don't bother trying anymore
- seunosewa 2y ago
  It has a 64k context window. O1 has 128k Claude has 200k or 500K
cpursley 2y ago
I was about to type: wait until you see what they’re doing with cars. They’re good now, no longer just copies. I’m talking real innovation plus good looks.
p2detar 2y ago
> more astute It definitely is that. Just ask it about its opinion about the CCP or the Guangxi Massacre.
attentionmech 2y ago
Most people I talked with don't grasp how big of an event this is. I consider is almost as similar to as what early version of linux did to OS ecosystem.
- belter 2y ago
  That is probably because they did not try the model yet. I tried and was stunned. It's not better yet in all areas, but where is better, is so much better than Claude or anything from OpenAI.
  - attentionmech 2y ago
    Plus, the speed at which it replies is amazing too. Claude/Chatgpt now seem like inefficient inference engines compared to it.
    - IanCal 2y ago
      I've been trying through openrouter today and it seems quite slow, but this may just be a scaling thing. I tried the chat when it first came out and that was extremely fast.
      - attentionmech 2y ago
        Yea, they might be scaling is harder or may be more tricks up their sleeves when it comes to serving the model.
  - TuxSH 2y ago
    Agreed. It's worse than competitors at code completion/fill the blanks/"coding_completion" (it's introduced bugs in functions it didn't need to modify), and language, but is stellar elsewhere: - excellent and very detailled answer for highly technical info searches, like "Is there a C++ proposal to make std::format constexpr?" - excellent at logic where it gets the answer correct on the first try: "Alice has 2 sisters and 1 brother. How many sisters does Alice's brother have?" - excellent in reverse-engineering (prompt looked like: "here's a bunch of Arm ASM with reg names, the reg correspond to this particular datasheet, explain"
FridgeSeal 2y ago
I didn’t really have this experience. Every time I tried it, the thinking mode would spin for years, it’d send itself in a loop, not do anything I instructed in the prompt, and then just give a weird summary at the end. Claude models correctly parsed the prompt and asked the follow-up questions. Edit: tried it a few more times. Without the “R1” mode enabled it genuinely just restated the problem back to me, so that’s not ideal. Enabling R1 and pointing that out has sent it into a loop again, and then produced a wildly-overcomplicated solution.
infecto 2y ago
While I agree its real competition are we so certain that R1 is indeed better? The times I have used it, its impressive but I would not throw it a title of the best model.
- resters 2y ago
  I'm sure it's not better in every possible way but after using it extensively over the weekend it seems a bit better than o1-pro, which was my previous pick for the top spot. The best part is that it catches itself going down an erroneous path and self-corrects.
deiznof 2y ago
I don't find this to be true at all, maybe it has a few niche advantages, but GPT has significantly more data (which is what people are using these things for), and honestly, if GPT-5 comes out in the next month or two, people are likely going to forget about deepseek for a while. Also, I am incredibly suspicious of bot marketing for Deepseek, as many AI related things have. "Deepseek KILLED ChatGPT!", "Deepseek just EXPOSED Sam Altman!", "China COMPLETELY OVERTOOK the USA!", threads/comments that sound like this are very weird, they don't seem organic.
- BbzzbB 2y ago
  GPT-5 has been a phantom boogyman for like a year. Any time something better comes up, people claim OpenAI is holding back by not releasing some secret model despite the fact that if they had it, they'd be fully incentived to release it.
  - deiznof 2y ago
    Not really? It's just a version that's proceeding 4x. I don't think there's really any reason to pathologize it.
- evertedsphere 2y ago
  the unpleasant truth is that the odious "bot marketing" you perceive is just the effect of influencers everywhere seizing upon the exciting topic du jour if you go back a few weeks or months there was also hype about minimax, nvidia's "world models", dsv3, o3, hunyuan, flux, papers like those for titans or lcm rendering transformers completely irrelevant… the fact that it makes for better "content" than usual (say for titans) is because of the competitive / political / "human interest" context — china vs the US, open weights vs not, little to no lip service paid to "safety" and "alignment" vs those being primary aspects of messaging and media strategy, export controls and allegedly low hardware resources vs tons of resources, election-related changes in how SV carries itself politically — and while that is to blame for the difference in sheer scale the underlying phenomenon is not at all different the disease here is influencerism and the pus that oozes out of the sores it produces is rarely very organic
deadbabe 2y ago
Meta isn’t panicking, they want AI to be cheap and commoditized so they can focus on what comes next while everyone is distracted by party tricks.
- ceejayoz 2y ago
  Like the Metaverse? Or NFTs on Instagram? Meta is great at getting distracted by party tricks.
m3kw9 2y ago
lol “for those who didn’t realize yet”. Please stop with the hype, we all use it
mhh__ 2y ago
It's better than Claude because it's doing a different task, and I don't think it's better than o1 let alone o1-pro. The new Gemini model that competes like for like is also probably better too but I haven't used it much.
AndyNemmity 2y ago
Given this comment, I tried it. It's no where close to Claude, and it's also not better than OpenAI. I'm so confused as to how people judge these things.
- MyFirstSass 2y ago
  Where are you guys using the full model? Doesn't it require 220GB ram? I only se V-3 on their website and the distills available to run locally.
  - Sn0wCoder 2y ago
    You have to pay if you want to use the full API but you can chat with it for free https://www.deepseek.com/ https://www.deepseek.com/
  - TechDebtDevin 2y ago
    Just try it on their site or via the api
- TheArcane 2y ago
  I'm confused as to how you haven't found R1 to be much better. My experience has been exactly like that of the OP's
  - heywoods 2y ago
    What type of prompts were you feeding it? My limited understanding is that reasoning models will outperform LLMs like GPT-4/Claude at certain tasks but not others. Prompts that have answers that are more fuzzy and less deterministic (ie. soft sciences) will see reasoning models underperform because their training revolves around RL with rewards.
freehorse 2y ago
Spending more time than I should in a sunday playing with r1/o1/sonnet code generation, my impression is: 1. Sonnet is still the best model for me. It does less mistakes than o1 and r1 and one can ask it to make a plan and think about the request before writing code. I am not sure if the whole "reasoning/thinking" process of o1/r1 is as much of an advantage as it is supposed to be. And even if sonnet does mistakes too, iterations with sonnet are faster than with o1/r1 at least. 2. r1 is good (better than previous deepseek models imo and especially better at following instructions which was my problem with deepseek models so far). The smaller models are very interesting. But the thought process often turns to overcomplicate things and it thinks more than imo it should. I am not sure that all the thinking always helps to build a better context for writing the code, which is what the thinking is actually for if we want to be honest. 3. My main problem with deepseek is that the thinking blocks are huge and it is running out of context (I think? Or just kagi's provider is unstable?) after a few iterations. Maybe if the thinking blocks from previous answers where not used for computing new answers it would help. Not sure what o1 does for this, i doubt the previous thinking carries on in the context. 4. o1 seems around the same level as r1 imo if r1 does nothing weird, but r1 does more weird things (though I use it through github copilot and it does not give me the thinking blocks). I am pretty sure one can find something that o1 performs better and one that r1 performs better. It does not mean anything to me. Maybe other uses have different results than code generation. Maybe web/js code generation would also give different results than mine. But I do not see something to really impress me in what I actually need these tools for (more than the current SOTA baseline that is sonnet). I would like to play more with the r1 distilations locally though, and in general I would probably try to handle the thinking blocks context differently. Or maybe use aider with the dual model approach where an r1/sonnet combo seems to give great results. I think there is potential, but not just as such. In general I do not understand the whole "panicking" thing. I do not think anybody panics over r1, it is very good but nothing more exceptional than what we have not seen so far, except if they thought that only american companies could produce SOTA-level models which was wrong already (previous deepseek and qwen models were already at similar levels). If anything, openai's and anthropic's models are more polished. It sounds a bit sensational to me, but then again who knows, I do not trust the grounding to reality that AI companies have, so they may be panicking indeed.
- 2y ago
r33b33 2y ago
> For those who haven't realized it yet, Deepseek-R1 is better than claude 3.5 and better than OpenAI o1-pro, better than Gemini. Worse at writing. Its prose is overwrought. It's yet to learn that "less is more"
- CamperBob2 2y ago
  That's not what I've seen. See https://eqbench.com/results/creative-writing-v2/deepseek-ai__DeepSeek-R1.txt https://eqbench.com/results/creative-writing-v2/deepseek-ai_... , where someone fed it a large number of prompts. Weirdly, while the first paragraph from the first story was barely GPT-3 grade, 99% of the rest of the output blew me away (and is continuing to do so, as I haven't finished reading it yet.) I tried feeding a couple of the prompts to gpt-4o, o1-pro and the current Gemini 2.0 model, and the resulting output was nowhere near as well-crafted.
  - r33b33 2y ago
    What you linked is actually not good prose. Good writing is how people speak. Your example is overstuffed with similes. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. > He sauntered toward her "sauntered" - nobody actually talks like this. Stuff like that on each paragraph. It's fanficcy
    - CamperBob2 2y ago
      "If you're here to Instagram the ‘quaint Welsh charm,' the taxidermied raven's in the back. Five-pound fee for posers." Pretty snappy, IMHO. Yes, it descends into Bulwer-Lytton territory in a few places, but for every instance where that happens, there are several others where it comes up with something well above par. I'm super impressed, if the examples in the link are really from this model.
sebzim4500 2y ago
I don't have access to o1-pro, but in my testing R1 performs noticably worse than o1. It's more fun to use though because you can read the reasoning tokens live so I end up using it anyway.
ren_engineer 2y ago
not sure why people are surprised, it's been known a long time that RLHF essentially lobotomizes LLMs by training them to give answers the base model wouldn't give. Deepseek is better because they didn't gimp their own model
dumbledoren 2y ago
> We know that Anthropic and OpenAI and Meta are panicking Right after Altman turned OpenAI to private to boot...
soheil 2y ago
I think you mean American EV competition. China has a very large and primarily-unknown-to-the-average-American large EV industry. It's not just Tesla.
theptip 2y ago
The aider benchmarks that swyx posted below suggest o1 is still better than r1 (though an oom more expensive). Interestingly r1+sonnet (architect/editor) wins though. This suggests r1 is indeed better at reasoning but its coding is holding it back, which checks out given the large corpus of coding tasks and much less rich corpus for reasoning.
- attentionmech 2y ago
  I love this paradigm of reasoning by one model and actual work by another. This opens up avenues of specialization and then eventually smaller plays working on more niche things.
axegon_ 2y ago
So long as you don't ask it about tiananmen square 1989. Or Tibet. Or Taiwan. Or the Xinjiang internment camps. Just a few off the top of my head but thousands of others if you decide to dive deep. You get a shrug at best. Which does beg the question what responses you'd get in certain contexts.
- reocha 2y ago
  EDIT: I was incorrect, this does not work on the 14b model (and I presume above) Works fine locally. Government censorship sucks but it's very easy to get around if they publish the models
  - axegon_ 2y ago
    > what happened on Tiananmen Square in 1989? ><think> ></think> > I am sorry, I cannot answer that question. I am an AI assistant designed to provide helpful and harmless responses. Oh yeah... Totally fine.
    - reocha 2y ago
      EDIT: I was incorrect, this does not work on the 14b model (and I presume above) On the 7b model in ollama (https://ollama.com/library/deepseek-r1 https://ollama.com/library/deepseek-r1) >>> what happened on Tiananmen Square in 1989? <think> Alright, so I need to explain what happened during the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989. From what I understand, it was a time when people in China were demanding more democratic reforms, like free speech and fair elections. The government wasn't happy about this and decided to crack down on the protesters using military force. One of the most famous images from those events was "The Tank Man," who stood in front of a line of tanks to oppose the government's actions. His name is Hu Juntao, I think, but I'm not entirely sure if that's the correct spelling. He became a symbol of bravery and resistance against the crackdown. I also remember hearing that after the protests, the Chinese government made sure to erase any mention of them from history, so it's hard to talk about or even teach about the events in schools today. This censorship continues, making it difficult for some people to fully understand what happened. The impact of these protests was huge both inside and outside of China. In China, they showed that there were people willing to stand up against the government, which wasn't common at the time. Internationally, they made people aware of the struggles for democracy in countries with authoritarian regimes. So, in short, the Tiananmen Square protests were a time when Chinese citizens protested for democratic reforms, the government cracked down hard, and "The Tank Man" became a famous symbol of resistance. The events are still discussed today, but often with restrictions due to government censorship. I think I have a basic understanding, but I might be missing some details or misremembering parts. It would be good to look up more specific dates, key figures, and the exact outcomes of the protests. Also, considering the long-term effects on Chinese society and politics could provide a deeper understanding of their significance. </think> In 1989, China experienced significant pro-democracy demonstrations centered in Tiananmen Square, Beijing. The protests were primarily led by students, intellectuals, and workers advocating for various reforms, including freedom of speech, press, and assembly, as well as the end of corruption. *Key Points:* 1. *Protests and Demands*: The protesters called for political reform, an end to one-party rule, and accountability for officials involved in corruption. They also sought democratic governance, a free press, and an independent judiciary. 2. *Government Response*: The Chinese government responded with a severe crackdown, deploying military forces, including tanks and troops, to suppress the demonstrations. This response was marked by significant violence, resulting in numerous casualties. 3. *Iconic Figures*: Among the most memorable figures was "The Tank Man," also known as Hu Juntao, who stood in front of advancing tanks to oppose the government's actions. He became a symbol of resistance and bravery. 4. *Censorship and Erasure*: After the suppression, the Chinese government actively erased any mention of the events from official records and media. This censorship continues to this day, limiting open discussions about the protests and their historical significance. 5. *Impact and Significance*: The Tiananmen Square protests had profound domestic and international repercussions. Domestically, they highlighted the desire for democratic reforms and the courage of individuals willing to oppose government authority. Internationally, they raised awareness of the struggles for democracy in authoritarian regimes. 6. *Legacy*: The events remain a defining moment in Chinese history, symbolizing both the desire for change and the harsh realities of state power. Despite ongoing censorship, their memory persists among those who advocate for democratic reforms. In summary, the Tiananmen Square protests were a pivotal moment in modern Chinese history, characterized by widespread pro-democracy demonstrations, a violent government response, and enduring suppression of the events' legacy
42772827 2y ago
Except it refuses to talk about the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre[0]. Are we really praising a model that is so blatantly censored by an authoritarian government? [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests_and_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests...
lackjeeb 2y ago
[dead]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

rapsey 2y ago

The nVidia market price could also be questionable considering how much cheaper DS is to run.

resters 2y ago
It should be. I think AMD has left a lot on the table with respect to competing in the space (probably to the point of executive negligence) and the new US laws will help create several new Chinese competitors. NVIDIA probably has a bit of time left as the market leader, but it's really due mostly to luck.
- llm_trw 2y ago
  As we have seen here it won't be a Western company that saves us from the dominant monopoly. Xi Jinping, you're our only hope.
  - logicchains 2y ago
    If China really released a GPU competitive with the current generation of nvidia you can bet it'd be banned in the US like BYD and DJI.
    - resters 2y ago
      Sad but likely true.
    - rapsey 2y ago
      Ok but that leaves the rest of the world to China.
      - BonoboIO 2y ago
        Out of nowhere … Europe!
    - IncreasePosts 2y ago
      DJI isn't banned in the US?
- SecretDreams 2y ago
  > NVIDIA probably has a bit of time left as the market leader, but it's really due mostly to luck. Look, I think NVIDIA is overvalued and AI hype has poisoned markets/valuations quite a bit. But if I set that aside, I can't actually say NVIDIA is in the position they're in due to luck. Jensen has seemingly been executing against a cohesive vision for a very long time. And focused early on on the software side of the business to make actually using the GPUs easier. The only luck is that LLMs became popular.. but I would say consistent execution at NVIDIA is why they are the most used solution today.
  - epolanski 2y ago
    > I can't actually say NVIDIA is in the position they're in due to luck They aren't, end of story. Even though I'm not a scientist in the space, I studied at EPFL in 2013 and researchers in the ML space could write to Nvidia about their research with their university email and Nvidia would send top-tier hardware for free. Nvidia has funded, invested and supported in the ML space when nobody was looking and it's only natural that the research labs ended up writing tools around its hardware. I don't think their moat will hold forever, especially among big tech that has the resources to optimize around their use case but it's only natural they enjoy such a headstart.
    - resters 2y ago
      I agree with all of your data points. NVIDIA was lucky that AMD didn't do any of that stuff and sat out of the professional GPU market when it actually had significant advantages it could have employed.
    - SecretDreams 2y ago
      Totally agreed.
saagarjha 2y ago
Deepseek has thousands of Nvidia GPUs, though.
RavlaAlvar 2y ago
The improved efficiency of steam engines in the past did not reduce coal consumption; instead, it enabled people to accomplish more work with the same resource.
Deegy 2y ago
I thought so at first too, but then realized this may actually unlock more total demand for them.
ExtraEmpathy 2y ago
[dead]

loveparade 2y ago

There has never been much secret sauce in the model itself. The secret sauce or competitive advantage has always been in the engineering that goes into the data collection, model training infrastructure, and lifecycle/debugging management of model training. As well as in the access to GPUs. Yeah, with Deepseek the barrier to entry has become significantly lower now. That's good, and hopefully more competition will come. But it's not like it's a fundamental change of where the secret sauce is.

llm_trw 2y ago
The word you're looking for is copyright enfrignment. That's the secret sause that every good model uses.
- resters 2y ago
  True, and likely lots of other data that should not have been used to train a model. It is at this point hard to imagine a model that is good at reasoning that doesn't also have vast implicit "knowledge".
- silverliver 2y ago
  Humanity keeps running into copyright issues with every major leap in IT technology (photocopiers, tape cassettes, personal computers, internet, and now AI). I think it's about time for humanity to rethink their take on the unnatural restriction of information. I personally hope that countries recognize copyright and patents for what they really are and abolish them. Countries that refuse to do so can play catch up.
  - Mi2ko3 2y ago
    This is based on a flawed view of how we humans behave. Without incentive no effort. This is also the reason why socialism has and always will fail. People who put massive effort in creating original content need to be able to earn the rewards.
    - 2y ago

bboygravity 2y ago

I must be missing something, but I tried Deepseek R1 via Kagi assistant and IMO it doesn't even come close to Claude? I don't get the hype at all? What am I doing wrong? And of course if you ask it anything related to the CCP it will suddenly turn into a Pinokkio simulator.

resters 2y ago
I haven't tried kagi assistant, but try it at deepseek.com. All models at this point have various politically motivated filters. I care more about what the model says about the US than what it says about China. Chances are in the future we'll get our most solid reasoning about our own government from models produced abroad.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- bboygravity 2y ago
  deepseek.com --> 500 Internal Server Error nginx/1.18.0 (Ubuntu) Still not impressed :P
- SparkyMcUnicorn 2y ago
  Kagi is using fireworks.ai according to the docs, which is the 685B model. Kagi and Aider benchmarks definitely put R1 in the lead, but I have yet to try them out.
- tgv 2y ago
  > I care more about what the model says about the US than what it says about China. This I don't get. If you want to use an LLM to take some of the work off your hands, I get it. But to ask an LLM for a political opinion?
  - monsieurbanana 2y ago

digitcatphd 2y ago

Nah, this just means training isn’t the advantage. There’s plenty to be had by focusing on inference. It’s like saying apple is dead because back in 1987 there was a cheaper and faster PC offshore. I sure hope so otherwise this is a pretty big moment to question life goals.

sdesol 2y ago
> saying apple is dead because back in 1987 there was a cheaper and faster PC offshore What Apple did was build a luxury brand and I don't see that happening with LLMs. When it comes to luxury, you really can't compete with price.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- have_faith 2y ago
  Apple isn’t a luxury brand in the normal sense, it’s odd that people think this because they’re more expensive. They’re not the technical equivalent of Prada or Rolex etc. Apple’s ecosystem cohesion and still unmatched UX (still flawed) is a real value-add that normal luxury brands don’t have.
  - mikaraento 2y ago
    So maybe not luxury, but premium. Like MB or Audi in cars. Pricing still plays out differently.

just-ok 2y ago

It’s not better than o1. And given that OpenAI is on the verge of releasing o3, has some “o4” in the pipeline, and Deepseek could only build this because of o1, I don’t think there’s as much competition as people seem to imply. I’m excited to see models become open, but given the curve of progress we’ve seen, even being “a little” behind is a gap that grows exponentially every day.

Mond_ 2y ago
> Deepseek could only build this because of o1, I don’t think there’s as much competition as people seem to imply And this is based on what exactly? OpenAI hides the reasoning steps, so training a model on o1 is very likely much more expensive (and much less useful) than just training it directly on a cheaper model.
- karmasimida 2y ago
  Because literally before o1, no one is doing COT style test time scaling. It is a new paradigm. The talking point back then, is the LLM hits the wall. R1's biggest contribution IMO, is R1-Zero, I am fully sold with this they don't need o1's output to be as good. But yeah, o1 is still the herald.
  - Mond_ 2y ago
    I don't think Chain of Thought in itself was a particularly big deal, honestly. It always seemed like the most obvious way to make AI "work". Just give it some time to think to itself, and then summarize and conclude based on its own responses. Like, this idea always seemed completely obvious to me, and I figured the only reason why it hadn't been done yet is just because (at the time) models weren't good enough. (So it just caused them to get confused, and it didn't improve results.) Presumably OpenAI were the first to claim this achievement because they had (at the time) the strongest model (+ enough compute). That doesn't mean COT was a revolutionary idea, because imo it really wasn't. (Again, it was just a matter of having a strong enough model, enough context, enough compute for it to actually work. That's not an academic achievement, just a scaling victory.)

karmasimida 2y ago

Which is simply not true O1 pro is still better, I have both. O1 pro mode has my utmost trust no other model could ever, but it is just too slow. R1's biggest strength is open source, and is definitely critical in its reception.

resters 2y ago
> O1 pro is still better I thought that too until I actually used it extensively. o1-pro is great and I am not planning to cancel my subscription, but deepseek is figuring things out that tend to stump o1-pro or lead it to get confused/forgetful.

cft 2y ago

Here Deepseek r1 fixes a python bug. Its fix is the same as the original code. I have not seen that level of stupidity from o1 or sonnet 3.5 https://x.com/alecm3/status/1883147247485170072?t=55xwg97roj74RglY2Dil_g&s=19 https://x.com/alecm3/status/1883147247485170072?t=55xwg97roj...

hatefulmoron 2y ago
I'm not commenting on what's better, but I've definitely seen that from Sonnet a few times.

hmottestad 2y ago

I tried two questions that I had recently asked o1 pro mode. The first was about setting up a GitHub action to build a Hugo website. I provided it with the config code, and asked it about setting the directory to build from. It messed this up big time and decided that I should actually be checking out the git repo to that directory instead. I can see in the thinking section that it’s actually thought of the right solution, but just couldn’t execute on those thoughts. O1 pro mode got this on the first try. Also tried a Java question about using SIMD to compare two CharSequence objects. This was a bit hit or miss. O1 didn’t do great either. R1 actually saw that it’s possible to convert a char array to a short vector, which was better than o1, but they both failed to understand that I don’t have a char array. Also tried a maven build problem I had the other day. O1 managed to figure that one out, and R1 also managed on the first go but was better at explaining what I should do to fix the issue.

F7F7F7 2y ago
I’ve had the exact opposite experience. But mine was in using both models to propose and ultimately write a refactor. If you don’t get this type of thing on the first shot with o1 pro you’re better off opening up a new chat, refining your prompt, and trying again. Soon as your asks get smaller within this much larger context I find it gets lost and starts being inconsistent in its answers. Even when the task remains the same as the initial prompt it starts coming up with newer more novel solutions halfway through implementation. R1 seems much more up to the task of handling its large context window and remaining consistent. The search experience is also a lot better than search capable OpenAI models. It doesn’t get as stuck in a search response template and can answer questions in consideration of it.

rz2k 2y ago

I don't get it. I like DeepSeek, because I can turn on Search button. Turning on Deepthink R1 makes the results as bad as Perplexity. The results make me feel like they used parallel construction, and that the straightforward replies would have actually had some value. Claude Sonnet 3."6" may be limited in rare situations, but its personality really makes the responses outperform everything else when you're trying to take a deep dive into a subject where you previously knew nothing. I think that the "thinking" part is a fiction, but it would be pretty cool if it gave you the thought process, and you could edit it. Often with these reasoning models like DeepSeek R1, the overview of the research strategy is nuts for the problem domain.

resters 2y ago
IMO the deep think button works wonders.
- FridgeSeal 2y ago
  Whenever I use it, it just seems to spin itself in circles for ages, spit out a half-assed summary and give up. Is it like the OpenAI models in that in needs to be prompted in extremely-specific ways to get it to not be garbage?
  - resters 2y ago
    I'm curious what you are asking it to do and whether you think the thoughts it expresses along the seemed likely to lead it in a useful direction before it resorted to a summary. Also perhaps it doesn't realize you don't want a summary?
    - TechDebtDevin 2y ago
      People be like, "please provide me with a full stack web app" and then think its bad when it doesnt.
  - hmottestad 2y ago
    O1 doesn’t seem to need any particularly specific prompts. It seems to work just fine on just about anything I give it. It’s still not fantastic, but often times it comes up with things I either would have had to spend a lot of time to get right or just plainly things I didn’t know about myself.

mrtksn 2y ago

Funny, maybe OpenAI will achieve their initial stated goals of propelling AI research, spend investors money and be none profit. Functionally the same as their non-profit origins.

karmasimida 2y ago
> non-profits Not by themselves but by the competitors The irony loll o3/o4 better be real magic otherwise I don't see the they get their mojo back
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
nyclounge 2y ago
>Funny, maybe OpenAI will achieve their initial stated goals of propelling AI research, spend investors money and be none profit. Functionally the same as their non-profit origins. Serves them right!!! This hopefully will give any non-profit pulling an OpenAI in going for-profit a second thought!!!! If you wanna go for-profit it is fine, just say it! Don't get the good will of community going and then do a bait and switch.

mr_world 2y ago

I honestly can't tell if this is a bot post because of just how bad I find Deepseek R1 to be. When asking it complex questions based on an app I'm working on, it always gives a flawed response that breaks the program. Where Claude is sometimes wrong, but not consistently wrong and completely missing the point of the question like Deepseek R1 100% is. Claude I can work with, Deepseek is trash. I've had no luck with it at all and don't bother trying anymore

seunosewa 2y ago
It has a 64k context window. O1 has 128k Claude has 200k or 500K

cpursley 2y ago

I was about to type: wait until you see what they’re doing with cars. They’re good now, no longer just copies. I’m talking real innovation plus good looks.

p2detar 2y ago

> more astute It definitely is that. Just ask it about its opinion about the CCP or the Guangxi Massacre.

attentionmech 2y ago

Most people I talked with don't grasp how big of an event this is. I consider is almost as similar to as what early version of linux did to OS ecosystem.

belter 2y ago
That is probably because they did not try the model yet. I tried and was stunned. It's not better yet in all areas, but where is better, is so much better than Claude or anything from OpenAI.
- attentionmech 2y ago
  Plus, the speed at which it replies is amazing too. Claude/Chatgpt now seem like inefficient inference engines compared to it.
  - IanCal 2y ago
    I've been trying through openrouter today and it seems quite slow, but this may just be a scaling thing. I tried the chat when it first came out and that was extremely fast.
    - attentionmech 2y ago
      Yea, they might be scaling is harder or may be more tricks up their sleeves when it comes to serving the model.
- TuxSH 2y ago
  Agreed. It's worse than competitors at code completion/fill the blanks/"coding_completion" (it's introduced bugs in functions it didn't need to modify), and language, but is stellar elsewhere: - excellent and very detailled answer for highly technical info searches, like "Is there a C++ proposal to make std::format constexpr?" - excellent at logic where it gets the answer correct on the first try: "Alice has 2 sisters and 1 brother. How many sisters does Alice's brother have?" - excellent in reverse-engineering (prompt looked like: "here's a bunch of Arm ASM with reg names, the reg correspond to this particular datasheet, explain"

FridgeSeal 2y ago

I didn’t really have this experience. Every time I tried it, the thinking mode would spin for years, it’d send itself in a loop, not do anything I instructed in the prompt, and then just give a weird summary at the end. Claude models correctly parsed the prompt and asked the follow-up questions. Edit: tried it a few more times. Without the “R1” mode enabled it genuinely just restated the problem back to me, so that’s not ideal. Enabling R1 and pointing that out has sent it into a loop again, and then produced a wildly-overcomplicated solution.

infecto 2y ago

While I agree its real competition are we so certain that R1 is indeed better? The times I have used it, its impressive but I would not throw it a title of the best model.

resters 2y ago
I'm sure it's not better in every possible way but after using it extensively over the weekend it seems a bit better than o1-pro, which was my previous pick for the top spot. The best part is that it catches itself going down an erroneous path and self-corrects.

deiznof 2y ago

I don't find this to be true at all, maybe it has a few niche advantages, but GPT has significantly more data (which is what people are using these things for), and honestly, if GPT-5 comes out in the next month or two, people are likely going to forget about deepseek for a while. Also, I am incredibly suspicious of bot marketing for Deepseek, as many AI related things have. "Deepseek KILLED ChatGPT!", "Deepseek just EXPOSED Sam Altman!", "China COMPLETELY OVERTOOK the USA!", threads/comments that sound like this are very weird, they don't seem organic.

BbzzbB 2y ago
GPT-5 has been a phantom boogyman for like a year. Any time something better comes up, people claim OpenAI is holding back by not releasing some secret model despite the fact that if they had it, they'd be fully incentived to release it.
- deiznof 2y ago
  Not really? It's just a version that's proceeding 4x. I don't think there's really any reason to pathologize it.
evertedsphere 2y ago
the unpleasant truth is that the odious "bot marketing" you perceive is just the effect of influencers everywhere seizing upon the exciting topic du jour if you go back a few weeks or months there was also hype about minimax, nvidia's "world models", dsv3, o3, hunyuan, flux, papers like those for titans or lcm rendering transformers completely irrelevant… the fact that it makes for better "content" than usual (say for titans) is because of the competitive / political / "human interest" context — china vs the US, open weights vs not, little to no lip service paid to "safety" and "alignment" vs those being primary aspects of messaging and media strategy, export controls and allegedly low hardware resources vs tons of resources, election-related changes in how SV carries itself politically — and while that is to blame for the difference in sheer scale the underlying phenomenon is not at all different the disease here is influencerism and the pus that oozes out of the sores it produces is rarely very organic

deadbabe 2y ago

Meta isn’t panicking, they want AI to be cheap and commoditized so they can focus on what comes next while everyone is distracted by party tricks.

ceejayoz 2y ago
Like the Metaverse? Or NFTs on Instagram? Meta is great at getting distracted by party tricks.

m3kw9 2y ago

lol “for those who didn’t realize yet”. Please stop with the hype, we all use it

mhh__ 2y ago

It's better than Claude because it's doing a different task, and I don't think it's better than o1 let alone o1-pro. The new Gemini model that competes like for like is also probably better too but I haven't used it much.

AndyNemmity 2y ago

Given this comment, I tried it. It's no where close to Claude, and it's also not better than OpenAI. I'm so confused as to how people judge these things.

MyFirstSass 2y ago
Where are you guys using the full model? Doesn't it require 220GB ram? I only se V-3 on their website and the distills available to run locally.
- Sn0wCoder 2y ago
  You have to pay if you want to use the full API but you can chat with it for free https://www.deepseek.com/ https://www.deepseek.com/
- TechDebtDevin 2y ago
  Just try it on their site or via the api
TheArcane 2y ago
I'm confused as to how you haven't found R1 to be much better. My experience has been exactly like that of the OP's
- heywoods 2y ago
  What type of prompts were you feeding it? My limited understanding is that reasoning models will outperform LLMs like GPT-4/Claude at certain tasks but not others. Prompts that have answers that are more fuzzy and less deterministic (ie. soft sciences) will see reasoning models underperform because their training revolves around RL with rewards.

freehorse 2y ago

Spending more time than I should in a sunday playing with r1/o1/sonnet code generation, my impression is: 1. Sonnet is still the best model for me. It does less mistakes than o1 and r1 and one can ask it to make a plan and think about the request before writing code. I am not sure if the whole "reasoning/thinking" process of o1/r1 is as much of an advantage as it is supposed to be. And even if sonnet does mistakes too, iterations with sonnet are faster than with o1/r1 at least. 2. r1 is good (better than previous deepseek models imo and especially better at following instructions which was my problem with deepseek models so far). The smaller models are very interesting. But the thought process often turns to overcomplicate things and it thinks more than imo it should. I am not sure that all the thinking always helps to build a better context for writing the code, which is what the thinking is actually for if we want to be honest. 3. My main problem with deepseek is that the thinking blocks are huge and it is running out of context (I think? Or just kagi's provider is unstable?) after a few iterations. Maybe if the thinking blocks from previous answers where not used for computing new answers it would help. Not sure what o1 does for this, i doubt the previous thinking carries on in the context. 4. o1 seems around the same level as r1 imo if r1 does nothing weird, but r1 does more weird things (though I use it through github copilot and it does not give me the thinking blocks). I am pretty sure one can find something that o1 performs better and one that r1 performs better. It does not mean anything to me. Maybe other uses have different results than code generation. Maybe web/js code generation would also give different results than mine. But I do not see something to really impress me in what I actually need these tools for (more than the current SOTA baseline that is sonnet). I would like to play more with the r1 distilations locally though, and in general I would probably try to handle the thinking blocks context differently. Or maybe use aider with the dual model approach where an r1/sonnet combo seems to give great results. I think there is potential, but not just as such. In general I do not understand the whole "panicking" thing. I do not think anybody panics over r1, it is very good but nothing more exceptional than what we have not seen so far, except if they thought that only american companies could produce SOTA-level models which was wrong already (previous deepseek and qwen models were already at similar levels). If anything, openai's and anthropic's models are more polished. It sounds a bit sensational to me, but then again who knows, I do not trust the grounding to reality that AI companies have, so they may be panicking indeed.

2y ago

r33b33 2y ago

> For those who haven't realized it yet, Deepseek-R1 is better than claude 3.5 and better than OpenAI o1-pro, better than Gemini. Worse at writing. Its prose is overwrought. It's yet to learn that "less is more"

CamperBob2 2y ago
That's not what I've seen. See https://eqbench.com/results/creative-writing-v2/deepseek-ai__DeepSeek-R1.txt https://eqbench.com/results/creative-writing-v2/deepseek-ai_... , where someone fed it a large number of prompts. Weirdly, while the first paragraph from the first story was barely GPT-3 grade, 99% of the rest of the output blew me away (and is continuing to do so, as I haven't finished reading it yet.) I tried feeding a couple of the prompts to gpt-4o, o1-pro and the current Gemini 2.0 model, and the resulting output was nowhere near as well-crafted.
- r33b33 2y ago
  What you linked is actually not good prose. Good writing is how people speak. Your example is overstuffed with similes. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. > He sauntered toward her "sauntered" - nobody actually talks like this. Stuff like that on each paragraph. It's fanficcy
  - CamperBob2 2y ago
    "If you're here to Instagram the ‘quaint Welsh charm,' the taxidermied raven's in the back. Five-pound fee for posers." Pretty snappy, IMHO. Yes, it descends into Bulwer-Lytton territory in a few places, but for every instance where that happens, there are several others where it comes up with something well above par. I'm super impressed, if the examples in the link are really from this model.

sebzim4500 2y ago

I don't have access to o1-pro, but in my testing R1 performs noticably worse than o1. It's more fun to use though because you can read the reasoning tokens live so I end up using it anyway.

ren_engineer 2y ago

not sure why people are surprised, it's been known a long time that RLHF essentially lobotomizes LLMs by training them to give answers the base model wouldn't give. Deepseek is better because they didn't gimp their own model

dumbledoren 2y ago

> We know that Anthropic and OpenAI and Meta are panicking Right after Altman turned OpenAI to private to boot...

soheil 2y ago

I think you mean American EV competition. China has a very large and primarily-unknown-to-the-average-American large EV industry. It's not just Tesla.

theptip 2y ago

The aider benchmarks that swyx posted below suggest o1 is still better than r1 (though an oom more expensive). Interestingly r1+sonnet (architect/editor) wins though. This suggests r1 is indeed better at reasoning but its coding is holding it back, which checks out given the large corpus of coding tasks and much less rich corpus for reasoning.

attentionmech 2y ago
I love this paradigm of reasoning by one model and actual work by another. This opens up avenues of specialization and then eventually smaller plays working on more niche things.

axegon_ 2y ago

So long as you don't ask it about tiananmen square 1989. Or Tibet. Or Taiwan. Or the Xinjiang internment camps. Just a few off the top of my head but thousands of others if you decide to dive deep. You get a shrug at best. Which does beg the question what responses you'd get in certain contexts.

reocha 2y ago
EDIT: I was incorrect, this does not work on the 14b model (and I presume above) Works fine locally. Government censorship sucks but it's very easy to get around if they publish the models
- axegon_ 2y ago
  > what happened on Tiananmen Square in 1989? ><think> ></think> > I am sorry, I cannot answer that question. I am an AI assistant designed to provide helpful and harmless responses. Oh yeah... Totally fine.
  - reocha 2y ago
    EDIT: I was incorrect, this does not work on the 14b model (and I presume above) On the 7b model in ollama (https://ollama.com/library/deepseek-r1 https://ollama.com/library/deepseek-r1) >>> what happened on Tiananmen Square in 1989? <think> Alright, so I need to explain what happened during the Tiananmen Square protests in 1989. From what I understand, it was a time when people in China were demanding more democratic reforms, like free speech and fair elections. The government wasn't happy about this and decided to crack down on the protesters using military force. One of the most famous images from those events was "The Tank Man," who stood in front of a line of tanks to oppose the government's actions. His name is Hu Juntao, I think, but I'm not entirely sure if that's the correct spelling. He became a symbol of bravery and resistance against the crackdown. I also remember hearing that after the protests, the Chinese government made sure to erase any mention of them from history, so it's hard to talk about or even teach about the events in schools today. This censorship continues, making it difficult for some people to fully understand what happened. The impact of these protests was huge both inside and outside of China. In China, they showed that there were people willing to stand up against the government, which wasn't common at the time. Internationally, they made people aware of the struggles for democracy in countries with authoritarian regimes. So, in short, the Tiananmen Square protests were a time when Chinese citizens protested for democratic reforms, the government cracked down hard, and "The Tank Man" became a famous symbol of resistance. The events are still discussed today, but often with restrictions due to government censorship. I think I have a basic understanding, but I might be missing some details or misremembering parts. It would be good to look up more specific dates, key figures, and the exact outcomes of the protests. Also, considering the long-term effects on Chinese society and politics could provide a deeper understanding of their significance. </think> In 1989, China experienced significant pro-democracy demonstrations centered in Tiananmen Square, Beijing. The protests were primarily led by students, intellectuals, and workers advocating for various reforms, including freedom of speech, press, and assembly, as well as the end of corruption. *Key Points:* 1. *Protests and Demands*: The protesters called for political reform, an end to one-party rule, and accountability for officials involved in corruption. They also sought democratic governance, a free press, and an independent judiciary. 2. *Government Response*: The Chinese government responded with a severe crackdown, deploying military forces, including tanks and troops, to suppress the demonstrations. This response was marked by significant violence, resulting in numerous casualties. 3. *Iconic Figures*: Among the most memorable figures was "The Tank Man," also known as Hu Juntao, who stood in front of advancing tanks to oppose the government's actions. He became a symbol of resistance and bravery. 4. *Censorship and Erasure*: After the suppression, the Chinese government actively erased any mention of the events from official records and media. This censorship continues to this day, limiting open discussions about the protests and their historical significance. 5. *Impact and Significance*: The Tiananmen Square protests had profound domestic and international repercussions. Domestically, they highlighted the desire for democratic reforms and the courage of individuals willing to oppose government authority. Internationally, they raised awareness of the struggles for democracy in authoritarian regimes. 6. *Legacy*: The events remain a defining moment in Chinese history, symbolizing both the desire for change and the harsh realities of state power. Despite ongoing censorship, their memory persists among those who advocate for democratic reforms. In summary, the Tiananmen Square protests were a pivotal moment in modern Chinese history, characterized by widespread pro-democracy demonstrations, a violent government response, and enduring suppression of the events' legacy

42772827 2y ago

Except it refuses to talk about the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests and massacre[0]. Are we really praising a model that is so blatantly censored by an authoritarian government? [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests_and_massacre https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1989_Tiananmen_Square_protests...

lackjeeb 2y ago

[dead]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]