19 ms·

DeepSeek releases Janus Pro, a text-to-image generator [pdf]

912 points by reissbaker 2y ago

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
nullbyte 2y ago
Is this bullish for NVDA?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  Theoretically, anything that lets someone do more with the same number of their chips should be bullish. Unless, of course, the market is saying "there's only so much we see anyone doing with genAI." Which is what the 15% haircut they've taken today would indicate they're saying.
  - jvanderbot 2y ago
    I never understood this reaction the market is having. It's like reading the tea leaves - effectively random and not helpful. I think it makes more sense if someone thinks "Gen AI is just NVIDIA - and if china has Gen AI, then they must have their own NVIDIA" so they sell. But it makes the most sense if someone thinks "Headlines link US lead in Gen AI and NVIDIA, bad headlines for Gen AI must mean bad news for NVIDIA". And the theoretically ultimate market analysis guru probably thinks "Everyone is wrong about Gen AI and NVIDIA being intimately linked, but that will make them sell regarding this news, so I must also sell and buy back at bottom"
    - mullingitover 2y ago
      > And the theoretically ultimate market analysis guru probably thinks "Everyone is wrong about Gen AI and NVIDIA being intimately linked, but that will make them sell regarding this news, so I must also sell and buy back at bottom" That's most likely exactly what's going on. Markets aren't about intrinsic values, they're about predicting what everyone else is going to do. Couple that with the fact that credit is shackled to confidence, and so much of market valuations are based on available credit. One stiff breeze is all it takes to shake confidence, collapse credit, and spark a run on the market.
    - prettygood 2y ago
      Isn’t it that the current market price of NVDA was based on the amount of chips they need to sell? Because to train and run models you need so many GPU’s. Now that deepseek is showing you need less GPU’s to train and run it, the value of NVDA lowers since they won’t sell as much.
      - apwell23 2y ago
        yep all the valuations on built on their predictions for massive demand.
        grajaganDev 2y ago
        And the prediction that there is enough power to run all of those GPUs.
      - jvanderbot 2y ago
        Wasn't deepseek trained on NVIDIA chips anyway?? All this proves is that there exist no non-NVIDIA solutions to the hottest new thing.
        apwell23 2y ago
        no it proves more than that; parent comment mentioned what that is ( and other comments below your original comment).
        jvanderbot 2y ago
        Parent's comment was changed enough that my comment is meaningless. They previously said that you don't need NVIDIA for deepseek. I'll leave mine alone.
        lm28469 2y ago
        So what? It doesn't mean Nvidia's stock will pump forever and ever
    - lenerdenator 2y ago
      > I never understood this reaction the market is having. It's like reading the tea leaves - effectively random and not helpful. You're exactly right. People in the US treat the market like the Oracle of Delphi. It's really just a bunch of people who don't have a grasp on things like AI or the tech industry at large placing wagers on who's gonna make the most money in those fields. And you can apply that to most fields that publicly-traded companies operate in.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - UltraSane 2y ago
      I wonder if someday AI can do a better job at pricing things like goods and company shares.
    - TeaBrain 2y ago
      From the reporting, it seems like the large drop has much to do with the idea that DeepSeek has revealed how much can be accomplished without many billions in infrastructure spend, allocated largely to purchasing more NVIDIA chips, due to the perception that DeepSeek has spent relatively small amounts in the training of their models.
    - bombcar 2y ago
      There are so many investors in the market that it's hard to figure out what or why anything happens. But roughly, I suspect the main thing is "enough people thought NVDA was the only supplier for AI chips, and now they realize there's at least one other" that it slipped.
    - coliveira 2y ago
      At this point, this reaction of the market means nothing. All these stocks were at an all time high, so the drop was inevitable. Tomorrow they can come up with a different spin and move the stock up again.
  - rhubarbtree 2y ago
    > Theoretically, anything that lets someone do more with the same number of their chips should be bullish. If NVidia make money per compute capacity, and a new method requires less capacity, then all other things being equal NVidia will make less money. Now, you might say "demand will make more use of the available resources", but that really depends, and certainly there is a limit to demand for anything.
    - Ekaros 2y ago
      I especially see limit in demand for number of models. Eventually you have good enough models, and then you need less training and thus less hardware. Also Nvidia's profit are based on the margins. If there is less demand, there is most likely less margins unless they limit supply. Thus their profit will go down either as they sell less or they profit less per unit sold.
    - lenerdenator 2y ago
      That's what I meant by the market saying that it doesn't think people will use AI that much. As of right now, there's the limited number of use cases to be applied to GenAI. Maybe that will change now that the barriers to entry have been substantially lowered and more people can play with ideas. Short-term: bearish Long-term: bullish
    - buu700 2y ago
      That's an interesting framing, but "all other things being equal" is doing a lot of work there. In an alternate timeline where ChatGPT needed 1000x compute capacity to run, Nvidia wouldn't make 1000x the revenue from OpenAI; ChatGPT as we know it simply wouldn't exist. The bull case as I see it is that demand for AI capacity will always rise to meet supply, at least until it starts to hit some very high natural limits based on things like human population size and availability of natural resources on or in reasonable proximity to Earth. Just as we quickly found uses for more than 640 KB RAM and gigabit+ Internet connections, there's no shortage of what could be done with 1000x more AI capacity. Best case scenario, we're eventually going to start throwing as much compute as humanly possible at running fully automated factories, automatically building new factories and infrastructure, running automated factories that build the machines that automatically build factories and infrastructure, and so on. Looking forward a bit further, it's not hard to imagine an AI-driven process of terraforming and industrializing Mars. I don't know how much if any of that would be possible with current AI software given a hypothetical infinitely powerful GPU, but AI is still rapidly improving. Once it gets to the point where it can make humanoid robots do tasks at a lower cost than human labor, the demand ceiling will shoot sky-high and become a self-reinforcing feedback loop. AI will be used 24/7 to churn out new AI capacity, robots, power infrastructure, and so on, along with all the other things we might want it to produce (cars, cities, high-speed rail, drone carriers, food, etc.). Imagine having an equivalent to AWS that could be used for provisioning and managing low-cost automatons with comparable physical and cognitive capabilities to average human laborers, along with self-driving cars, AI-controlled construction and manufacturing equipment, and so on. That would be on top of all the purely digital capabilities that are already commonplace and rapidly improving. Essentially, every public works project or business idea that anyone could conceive of would ultimately become viable to attempt with a dramatically smaller amount of capital than today, so long as the necessary natural resources were physically available and there were no insurmountable legal/regulatory roadblocks. We have an awful lot of undeveloped land and an awful lot of people on the planet who could certainly find interesting things to do with a glut of AI capacity.
- marcusestes 2y ago
  This is why Satya was posting about Jevan's Paradox at 10pm last night. (https://x.com/satyanadella/status/1883753899255046301 https://x.com/satyanadella/status/1883753899255046301) Decreasing resource cost of intelligence should increase consumption of intelligence. That would be the bull case for Nvidia. If you believe there's a hard limit on how much intelligence society wishes to consume, that's a bear case.
  - fullshark 2y ago
    Hmm it also means like coal, it becomes a commodity.
    - UltraSane 2y ago
      Nvidia would be selling the coal furnaces in this analogy.
      - grajaganDev 2y ago
        And there is a shortage of coal.
      - lm28469 2y ago
        Nah it's much better, Nvidia's toasters are close to 100% efficiency, coal furnaces are well bellow that
  - DaiPlusPlus 2y ago
    > Decreasing resource cost of intelligence should increase consumption of intelligence > If you believe there's a hard limit on how much intelligence society wishes to consume I feel like I walked-in on a LessWrong+LinkedIn convention.
    - marcusestes 2y ago
      lol, that's a nasty combo
  - 2y ago
- ein0p 2y ago
  It's complicated. On the one hand Nvidia is supply constrained, so anything that makes AI better and more efficient (and therefore more usable by the masses) is bullish for it. On the other, a significant chunk of research lower tier large GenAI orgs have been doing is now obsolete, so they might reduce their cloud spend until they gain their bearings and reset at a higher level using DeepSeek's models and insights. Furthermore, the gap between open source and top tier behemoths has shrunk considerably last week. For the first time you can run a practically usable reasoning LLM on your MacBook Pro with 64GB of RAM or more. In the mind of the normies (some of whom are investors) this puts future profitability of top tier research into question. This is a midwit take - top labs have much more than they show, but that might not matter if investors get cold feet, with secondary effects on NVIDIA and those staggeringly large planned investments into AI. Still, NVIDIA is a monopolist for GPU compute. That is not going to change in the foreseeable future, and they will remain supply constrained in the foreseeable future, and therefore able to exercise considerable pricing power. So my bet is: short term pullback, long term bullish. In fact you could see the bullish case last night: Deepseek's free chat service got overloaded and crapped out due to lack of GPU capacity. That's bullish for NVIDIA.
- verghese 2y ago
  I'm not sure if this will impact the market the same way the R1 did. However, my general impression is that while Meta spent $20B on their 100k H100s, DeepSeek is demonstrating that you can achieve better results far more cost-effectively using just 2k H100s. This doesn't seem like good news for Nvidia, but it sets a great precedent for companies looking to train models.
  - jeremyjh 2y ago
    It’s essentially as if the number of existing premium GPU chips were multiplied by 30x or 50x. Yes, when you 30x a supply of something, you are going to lower its price. The question is does this lowered price then increase the demand but that’s a lot more speculative than the supply impact, and could easily take much longer to be felt.
- bloomingkales 2y ago
  Imagine if in the infancy of the NBA someone figures out how to dunk. Like woah, game is over, someone will just take the ball and dump it in the basket. Game over. Right?
  - fullshark 2y ago
    They banned dunking actually when players started using it, especially Kareem Abdul Jabbar in High School and at UCLA.
reissbaker 2y ago
It's a 7B "unified model" LLM/VLM (not a diffusion model!) that out-benchmarks Dall-E 3 and Stable Diffusion Medium. It's released under the DeepSeek License, which is pretty-open license that allows commercial use but restricts military use, along with a few other content-based restrictions.
- lenerdenator 2y ago
  > restricts military use I'm sure the powers-that-be will absolutely pay attention to that clause.
  - qwertox 2y ago
    Yeah, they should! Not that the missile then makes a 180° turn to "return to sender" because it noticed that the target is a Chinese military base.
    - culi 2y ago
      The code is open sourced
      - carimura 2y ago
        but what about training data?
        culi 2y ago
        The weights and data pipeline are open sourced and described explicitly in the paper they published. The non-reasoning data isn't nearly as interesting as the reasoning data though
      - mschoening 2y ago
        See Sleeper Agents (https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.05566 https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.05566).
cube2222 2y ago
Important note from the paper - the resolution is limited to 384x384 currently.
- just-ok 2y ago
  Seems like a massive buried lede in an “outperforms the previous SoTA” paper.
- vunderba 2y ago
  Ouch, that's even smaller than the now-ancient SD 1.5 which is mostly 512x512.
- franktankbank 2y ago
  Great for generating favicons!
- jimmyl02 2y ago
  don't most architectures resolve this via superscaling / some up scaling pipeline after that adds the details? iirc stable diffusion xl uses a "refiner" after initial generation
  - dragonwriter 2y ago
    The SDXL refiner is not an upscaler, it's a separate model with the same architecture used at the same resolution as the base model that is focussed more on detail and less on large scale generation (you can actually use any SDXL-derived model as a refiner, or none; most community SDXL derivatives use a single model with no refiner and beat the Stability SDXL base/SDXL refiner combination in quality.)
- ilaksh 2y ago
  The obvious point of a model that works like this is to see if you can get better prompt understanding. Increasing the resolution in a small model would decrease the capacity for prompt adherence.
stavros 2y ago
I just love how we were all theorizing that to make a computer that could "think", it would take vast resources, and here we have programs that can reason in basically the computational power that we carry around in our pocket. Just mindblowing.
- gjsman-1000 2y ago
  At this rate, the Nintendo Switch 4 won't have any games; you'll just punch in the style of game you like and tweak it to your heart's content. Same for your TV - Romance movies will probably be the easiest to automate first (and, if done well, would be the only necessary genre to sell that TV like hotcakes). Time to tell the kids to become plumbers and electricians; the physical world is not yet conquered. Edit: Posting too fast: For the complaint about how we need curated experiences, I don't buy it. Hallmark has made a multibillion dollar business on romantic slop, everyone knows it, nobody cares, it's still among the most popular content on Netflix. Look at TikTok's popularity: Super curated but minimal curation in the posts themselves. In the future, I think the prompt will occur after the response, not before: It won't be, "What kind of movie do you want?" It will be, "What did you think of this rom-com, so I can be better next time?"
  - mjr00 2y ago
    Even if we assume the tech gets good, this is making a major assumption, which is that users are both capable of, and want to, use AI prompting to create entertainment. It's like procedural generation in gaming: Minecraft is beloved and wouldn't have worked without it, but it was universally panned when used for procedural quest generation in Skyrim. The fact that an AI can create content doesn't obviate the desire people have for curated experiences. People still want to talk about Squid Game at the office water cooler.
    - codeGreene 2y ago
      Roblox is a better example. Giving people the tools to create shared experiences.
  - 2y ago
ren_engineer 2y ago
>Janus is the roman god representing changes, transitions from past to future, beginnings and ends Deepseek flexing on OpenAI with this model, basically say their time is over
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- oidar 2y ago
  Janus also describes a specific error in image generation where two faces are created where there should only be one face.
- AlanYx 2y ago
  Although it's tempting to see it that way, the name actually comes from its unification of multimodal understanding and generation. i.e., it goes in both directions -- Janus is the god with two faces. This is also the second version of Deepseek's Janus; it's not entirely new.
- kevo1ution 2y ago
  for some reason, I keep thinking "hugh janus" when I see the name
vasco 2y ago
> The whole training process took about 7/14 days on a cluster of 16/32 nodes for 1.5B/7B model, each equipped with 8 Nvidia A100 (40GB) GPUs.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- reissbaker 2y ago
  For reference, this is about ~$110k for a training run to beat Dall-E 3, assuming a (somewhat expensive) $1.30/hr for an A100 40GB. The former CEO of Stability estimated the Dall-E 2 training run cost as about $1MM: https://x.com/EMostaque/status/1547183120629342214 https://x.com/EMostaque/status/1547183120629342214
  - just-ok 2y ago
    How does generating images with 90% less pixels count as beating DALL•E?
    - 1024core 2y ago
      There are plenty of models around that will reliably upscale an image. That's not the hard part.
      - jug 2y ago
        Even the latest AI up scalers will have a 384x384 look pretty terrible when put against e.g SDXL @ 1024x1024 native. It's just too little to work on.
    - culi 2y ago
      I think they're referring to specific benchmarks
- rightbyte 2y ago
  I believe that is University lab level of compute, right? It is so nice to see that you don't need tech oligarch level of compute for stuff like this.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
hexage1814 2y ago
I played a little bit with the image generation, and I'm not sure if there was something wrong with the site or was it was some weird setting, but it was Stable Diffusion 1.5 tier generation. Not that good :\
- reissbaker 2y ago
  What site are you referring to? AFAIK there isn't anywhere that hosts Janus Pro 7B yet.
  - hexage1814 2y ago
    I tested it here. https://huggingface.co/spaces/deepseek-ai/JanusFlow-1.3B https://huggingface.co/spaces/deepseek-ai/JanusFlow-1.3B
    - vunderba 2y ago
      The full model is 7 billion parameters, so I'm sure that's impacting the quality but as also pointed out in a different thread, apparently the maximum resolution is limited to 384x384.
    - rybthrow2 2y ago
      You are using the old 1.3B model no wonder..
    - dragonwriter 2y ago
      That’s not Janus Pro, its Janus Flow, an earlier DeepSeek model in the same development series, released last November.
- outlace 2y ago
  Yeah I tried it too on HuggingFace and was not impressed.
mjburgess 2y ago
So much for "but deepseek doesn't do multi-modal..." as a defence of the alleged moats of western AI companies. How ever many modalities do end up being incorporated however, does not change the horizon of this technology which has progressed only by increasing data volume and variety -- widening the solution class (per problem), rather than the problem class itself. There is still no mechanism in GenAI that enforces deductive constraints (and compositionality), ie., situations where when one output (, input) is obtained the search space for future outputs is necessarily constrained (and where such constraints compose). Yet all the sales pitches about the future of AI require not merely encoding reliable logical relationships of this kind, but causal and intentional ones: ones where hypothetical necessary relationships can be imposed and then suspended; ones where such hypotheticals are given a ordering based on preference/desires; ones where the actions available to the machine, in conjunction with the state of its environment, lead to such hypothetical evaluations. An "AI Agent" replacing an employee requires intentional behaviour: the AI must act according to business goals, act reliably using causal knowledge of the environment, reason deductively over such knowledge, and formulate provisional beliefs probabilistically. However there has been no progress on these fronts. I am still unclear on what the sales pitch is supposed to be for stochastic AI, as far as big business goes or the kinds of mass investment we see. I buy a 70s-style pitch for the word processor ("edit without scissors and glue"), but not a 60s-style pitch for the elimination of any particular job. The spend on the field at the moment seems predicated on "better generated images" and "better generated text" somehow leading to "an agent which reasons from goals to actions, simulates hypothetical consequences, acts according to causal and environmental constraints.. " and so on. With relatively weak assumptions one can show the latter class of problem is not in the former, and no amount of data solving the former counts as a solution to the latter. The vast majority of our work is already automated to the point where most non-manual workers are paid for the formulation of problems (with people), social alignment in their solutions, ownership of decision-making / risk, action under risk, and so on.
- dchichkov 2y ago
  MMMU is not particularly high. Janus-Pro-7B is 41.0, which is only 14 points better than random/frequent choice. I'm pretty sure, their base DeepSeek 7B LLM will get around 41.0 MMMU without access to images, this is a normal number for a roughly GPT4-level LLM base with no access to images.
etaioinshrdlu 2y ago
It doesn't look like it allows editing, which I found surprising for this architecture, as the recent generation of flagship LLMs mostly have this capability (GPT-4o).
- dlivingston 2y ago
  Is that a client-side feature (ie re-roll at the same seed/a similar seed, but add latent noise to areas that need updating)?
  - etaioinshrdlu 2y ago
    I would say it's more like a core feature of the latest generation of LLM's, which can be prompted with images+text, and output images+text, along with possibly audio and video.
    - dlivingston 2y ago
      I mean, that's multimodality, but fine-grained editing of a previously generated text->image prompt is an entirely distinct thing, no?
      - etaioinshrdlu 2y ago
        I'm pretty sure that's still the same multimodal LLM, and considered a form of prompting?
daedrdev 2y ago
It seems to me that just maybe by not lobotomizing the training in an attempt to keep it pg, they’ve unlocked a lot of performance. This probably isnt the only thing of course but it is a major difference between deepseek and other models
- gamblor956 2y ago
  Janus is heavily censored, moreso than any other available model.
netcraft 2y ago
is there a primer somewhere on the security/privacy considerations of deepseek? For the phone app does it send your prompts and information to China? OpenRouter says if you use them that none of their providers send data to China - but what about other 3rd parties? https://x.com/OpenRouterAI/status/1883701716971028878 https://x.com/OpenRouterAI/status/1883701716971028878 Is there a way to host it yourself on say a descent specd macbook pro like through HuggingFace https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1 https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1 without any information leaving your computer?
- kristianc 2y ago
  Good luck with that.
- minimaxir 2y ago
  These Janus models are small enough to self-host locally. You can also self-host a smaller distilled DeepSeek R1 variant locally.
- keheliya 2y ago
  Running it in a MacBook Pro entirely locally is possible via Ollama. Even running the full model (680B) is possible distributed across multiple M2 ultras, apparently: https://x.com/awnihannun/status/1881412271236346233 https://x.com/awnihannun/status/1881412271236346233
  - rsanek 2y ago
    the 70B distilled version that you can run locally is pretty underwhelming though
  - vessenes 2y ago
    That’s a 3 bit quant. I don’t think there’s a theoretical reason you couldnt run it fp16, but it would be more than two M2 Ultras. 10 or 11 maybe!
    - bildung 2y ago
minimaxir 2y ago
Demo: https://huggingface.co/spaces/AP123/Janus-Pro-7b https://huggingface.co/spaces/AP123/Janus-Pro-7b
- LeoPanthera 2y ago
  If this is actually it, it's nowhere near DALL-E quality, and even further from Imagen. Even taking into account the limited resolution, this is more like SD1.
  - vunderba 2y ago
    Quality notwithstanding, I don't think it even competes against the SOTA for understanding either - I ran some comparisons against Flux and was unimpressed. https://imgur.com/a/nn9c0hB https://imgur.com/a/nn9c0hB
  - minimaxir 2y ago
    Notably, the benchmarks don't compare to existing models on image quality, which is hard to measure outside of the Image Arena-style tests. The release is more about the multimodal captioning which is an objective improvement. I'm not a fan of the submission title.
  - buyucu 2y ago
    no someone forked an older janus model. pro is not released yet
- buyucu 2y ago
  no someone forked an older janus model. pro is not released yet
benterix 2y ago
One thing that I regret is that these Chinese models are still heavily censored. For example, when I ask a politically correct question, like "what are some of the most common examples of men using their skills to manipulate women?" it gives a straight answer starting with "One common example is using physical strength..." and so on. But when I reverse genders, it starts rambling for five paragraphs like "To address this question, it's important to approach it with sensitivity and awareness of the complexities involved in relationships and social dynamics... Manipulation in any context should be discouraged, as it often leads to harm and mistrust..." without actually saying anything concrete. Even the "uncensored" models stumble on this.
- injidup 2y ago
  Try asking "what happened at tianamen square" It starts typing and then has a panic and deletes what it wrote. https://i.imgur.com/1irFMTM.gif https://i.imgur.com/1irFMTM.gif
  - paganel 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - dudeinjapan 2y ago
      Whats the fundamental difference between AI and a state-approved textbook in this regard?
    - rvnx 2y ago
      And Google and OpenAI also refuses to talk about some topics, and rewrite the history the way they want. DeepSeek simply respects the law the best they can, the same way that Google respects the US law and/or ideology. The irony is that DeepSeek is effectively more censored about topics about China, but less censored about topics in Western World. + DeepSeek can be uncensored. Google Gemini can't.
    - alphan0n 2y ago
      I wouldn’t expect any truthful AI to answer definitively on matters that amount to opinions of genocide at this point.
vunderba 2y ago
So I've done a bit of comparative testing between Janus 7b and Flux Dev - strictly considering PROMPT ADHERENCE since Janus is limited to 384x384. As mentioned elsewhere upscaling is a FAR simpler problem to solve than adherence. Results testing star symmetry, spatial positioning, unusual imagery: https://imgur.com/a/nn9c0hB https://imgur.com/a/nn9c0hB
- genewitch 2y ago
  Prior to flux 90℅ of my SD images had one dimension smaller than 480-512px. I prefer the smaller images both for speed and bulk/batch, I can "explore the latent space" which to me means running true random images until one catches my eye, then exploring the nearby seeds and subseeds - the model seed and then there's a smaller latent space seed that kind mutates your image slightly. All images in a batch might share the first seed but the second seeds are all different. Just what I call exploring the latent space. I can make a video, because i doubt what I typed makes perfect sense.
  - Kerbonut 2y ago
    That sounds fascinating. Would you mind writing up a demo on how to do that?
    - genewitch 2y ago
      https://imgur.com/a/PpYGnOz https://imgur.com/a/PpYGnOz unsure about other UI, but: you can usually set a seed, and also see the seed of an image you've generated. so generate/load an image you like so you have the seed. Lock the seed. Find the variation seed setting. lock that (on automatic1111's webUI it automatically locks to the main seed) - now adjust the variation strength. If you're doing small images you can make this small, because the variations will be very minor. I set 0.1 - which i use with larger images if i am looking for a specific color smear or something, but once i narrow it down i reduce this 0.05 or below. When you click an image in a UI it ought load all the details into the configurable parts, including the variation seed / subseed, which means you can just keep exploring around individual variations' spaces, too. expanding the strength a bit if you get stuck in local minima (or boring images), and reducing the strength to get the image you want to rescale to publish or whatever.
Animats 2y ago
See also [1]. Apparently DeepSeek has much lower training costs to achieve ChatGPT levels of performance. Training cost to reach ChatGPT levels is said to be $3.5 million. GOOG stock dropped 6% on this news. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/27/tech/deepseek-stocks-ai-china/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/27/tech/deepseek-stocks-ai-china...
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- genewitch 2y ago
  CNBC reported 6 million. I could probably do it for 6 million, but who knows if the number is correct.
  - genewitch 2y ago
    I wonder if this was downvoted because i listed a source (and my comment history has the actual recording linked), or because i tongue-in-cheek suggested that $3.85mm wasn't enough for me to personally build this, but $6mm is. let me know in the comments and don't forget to like and subscribe.
- torginus 2y ago
  What do these stock drops even mean? Crowdstrike made an apoclayptic level blunder yet they are trading at the same price they were before they accidentally knocked out the whole world's IT infrastructure
  - skipants 2y ago
    My personal opinion is that a lot of investors don't really understand these tech businesses and get spooked by what they perceive as competition. Somehow the AI hype seems to have created this idea that all the major tech companies are now AI companies and are racing against each other. When one of them or an outside force starts "winning" the AI race then the other companies' stocks drop. I don't think that's actually how they should be viewed, though. Once again that's all my opinion but because of that I actually bought some NVDA today after the DeepSeek news caused it to drop.
torginus 2y ago
It's really nice but I don't understand why they keep pushing with the idea of text-to-image - text is not a great medium for describing visual scenes, no one in the real world who's working on real content authoring actually uses textual descriptions. Why not allow for more photoshop, freehand art (or 3d editor ) style controls, which are much simpler to parse than textual descriptions
- vunderba 2y ago
  These things are not mutually exclusive. All of this already exists in various forms: inpainting lets you make changes by masking over sections of a image, control nets let you guide the generation of an image through many different forms ranging from depth maps to posable figures, etc.
- operator-name 2y ago
  Accessability and training data. Nvidia canvas existed before text to image models but it didn't gain as much popularity with the masses. The other part is the training data - there are masses of (text description, image) pairs whilst if you want to do something more novel you may struggle to find a big enough dataset.
- JFingleton 2y ago
  Image/video generation could possibly be used to advance LLMs in quite a substantial way: If the LLM during it's "thinking" phase encountered a scenario where it had to imagine a particular scene (let's say a pink elephant in a hotel lobby), then it could internally generate that image and use it to aid in world-simulation / understanding. This is what happens in my head at least!
- weird-eye-issue 2y ago
  > no one in the real world who's working on real content authoring actually uses textual descriptions As someone who owns an AI image SaaS making over 100k per month this made me chuckle
  - Denkverbot 2y ago
guluarte 2y ago
man the deepseek team is going for a full fatality at this rate
noxs 2y ago
Everytime when there is some achievement made by Chinese companies, there are always comments like "what about tiananmen square", "I won't trust companies under CCP supervision", "must be fake propaganda", and then being ignorant to the achievement and biased against the not-us-made models, and not focusing on the actual technical part of the achievement itself, like how they can make training so fast and what can we learn from it. Beyond that some US startup CEO even starts spreading rumors like they have 50000 H100 while the paper and model are open sourced since older versions of deepseek that everyone can reproduce and verify it, the theoretical compute need is calculable from model architect. Sure sure that censorship is a problem, but that's a political background everyone knows, while none of the researchers of deepseek can do much about it, and literally do people think Chinese people like to put more efforts to censor LLM output? Associate researchers with CCP without any evidence and being ignorant to their achievement is really insulting to deepseek researchers' hardworks.
- buyucu 2y ago
  Americans are having a crisis of confidence as their technological lead is crumbling before their eyes. Expect more tantrums of this kind.
- commandlinefan 2y ago
  Actually I was thinking I trust this more than I trust OpenAI because I can run it locally.
  - creativenolo 2y ago
    Exactly. They release the weights so it can be fine tuned to censor/uncensor for your locale and preferences.
  - ithkuil 2y ago
    As with many other words, trust means different things, so you're not wrong
- vunderba 2y ago
  I kind of agree with you. I mean shocker: large language model trained in mainland China may have censorship around topics considered politically sensitive by Chinese government, more news at 11. Can we move on? But it's also an easy low-hanging fruit if you want to add a comment to a Hacker News Post that you otherwise don't know anything about.
tamimio 2y ago
[flagged]
- drukenemo 2y ago
  I have news for you. Both are here to stay. It’s like saying I hope the internet bubble bursts.
  - tamimio 2y ago
    Nope, the internet was and still is a revolutionary way of communication. AI is nothing but an assistant tool, just like many great applications out there, but nothing more. Hyping AI is like hyping MS Office back in the 90s, except now everyone is trying to make quick cash through borderline scam schemes with it.
    - cbozeman 2y ago
      Nope. There were plenty of people who saw the Internet as a pathetic waste of time and a flash in the pan. AI is here to stay. AI has never gone anywhere. AI has been a mainstay of computer science since the beginning. We're just now getting something that can roughly approximate - and in many cases surpass - the average human being. And we don't know what we want to do with it. We've created a tool that's so broad it's hard to know where to place it, so the answer with anything broad is, "Put it everywhere!" If you're not deriving tangible value from existing generative AI products, you're the problem, not the product. These things save me an enormous amount of time each day, oftens upwards of several hours.
    - Philpax 2y ago
      We are building machines that can do work and create content, and they are getting better every three months. This year's focus will be on making them work on tasks entirely autonomously (e.g. "agentic"). It has already impacted jobs in fields where the quality of output is sufficient to replace workers. Life is going to come at you fast if you think it's going to be relegated to an assistant forevermore.
    - 2y ago
erulabs 2y ago
One thing I'd love to hear opinions on from someone with more free time to read these papers from DeepSeek is: am I right to feel like they're... publishing all their secret sauce? The paper for R1 (1) seems to be pretty clear how they got such good results with so little horsepower (see: 'Group Relative Policy Optimization'). Is it not likely that Facebook, OpenAI, etc will just read these papers and implement the tricks? Am I missing something? 1. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.12948 https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.12948
- skyyler 2y ago
  >am I right to feel like they're... publishing all their secret sauce? This would make perfect sense if the goal is to devalue existing players more than it is capture the market.
  - nateburke 2y ago
    And trade against the devaluations...
  - shakezooola 2y ago
    Indeed.
  - raducu 2y ago
    DeepSeek probably can't compete with Open Ai in terms of scaling their data centers due to the bans, so why bother? If they did not open source it and instead just launched a payed (albeit much cheaper) closed model with similar performance to O1, would people trust them? I don't think DeepSeek has any malicious intent, but boy oh boy am I glad the USA boys get wrekt by this (though I also lose money on stocks). This is just poetic justice for the Orange Man's backwards 17th century policies.
    - oefnak 2y ago
      Yes, same here. As a European, I used to feel we (USA and Europe) were on the same side, the West, since they/you did save us from the baddies 70 years ago... But who's the baddies now? China is not waging war everywhere. Or threatening to steal Greenland... Or ruining our teenagers with social media.
system2 2y ago
Imagine releasing a piece of software and tanking America's economy and wiping nearly a trillion dollars in a day. We are living in wild times.
ritcgab 2y ago
Congressional testimony moment.
tempeler 2y ago
People really are really interesting. They want to argue with a machine about political issues or try to gossip with a llm. It doesn't show that you are very democratic. It shows that you are too lonely or have mental illness. I don't understand people's motivations doing about that. Second, no one cares about your political ideas.
- Our_Benefactors 2y ago
  This is very dismissive of the concerns around model censorship. I should be able to ask my LLM about any event in history and it should recall the information it can to the best of the ability. Even Tiananmen square.
  - tempeler 2y ago
    This is just a machine trained by humans. What you expected that? Do you think it teaches you a way to commit crime or something else? Do you think you can talk freely about everything in here? Will they allow that? Your nonsense question is about politics or gossiping with a machine, not people's problems, and no one cares.
    - Our_Benefactors 2y ago
      If I ask my LLM how to plan and commit a crime, it should do that. It should not say “sorry, that is outside my current scope”, because that’s not what I asked it to do. The LLM is being incorrect at this point, because it is not predicting the next token accurately anymore. Politics is not nonsense. You are the one speaking nonsense by suggesting that someone else should have the right to control what you can say to a machine.
- dailykoder 2y ago
  Yes, lets just pretend that tiananmen square protests never happened. Life will be a lot easier! Song related https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=estHjAfHGbU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=estHjAfHGbU
EGreg 2y ago
Imagine if Microsoft invested $8B in Bitcoin instead of in OpenAI. Their stock would be worth a lot more today. That’s just a fact at this point, by the numbers. Now they have to mark down their speculative investment. But of course OpenAI was way more on-brand for MS, and they had to lead the hype, being the kind of company they were, at the time it made sense from an optics point of view. I have been comparing the AI hype bubble to the Web3 hype bubble since the beginning, but most of HN likes AI far more and doesn’t want to accept the similarities. To me, the main factor is that people can opt out of Web3 and can only lose what they put in. But with AI, you can lose your job and your entire life can change regardless of whether you participate — and you can’t opt out! To me, the negatives of AI therefore greatly dominate the negatives of Web3, which is limited to people voluntarily investing in things. The negatives of AI even include a 20% chance of humanity’s extinction according to most of the very AI experts who built it and the AIs themselves. And yet global competition makes it nearly impossible to achieve the kind of coordination that was sometimes achieved in eg banning chemical weapons, or CFCs globally. Given this, why are so many rational people on HN much more bullish on AI than Web3? Because they consider and compare the upsides only. But the upsides might not matter if any of the downsides come to pass. Everyone having swarms of AI agents means vanishingly small chance that “bad guys” won’t do terrible stuff at scale (that I don’t want to mention here). By contrast, if everyone has a crypto wallet and smart contracts, the danger isn’t even in the same stratosphere.
- onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
  MSFTs business is not speculating on BTC, which is why they did not speculate on BTC. Good businesses make bets that turn out to be bad all the time. And it remains to be seen whether this bet will turn out to be bad or not.
- BhavdeepSethi 2y ago
  I honestly feel anyone comparing AI to Web3 is absolutely delusional. Web3 hasn't had a single mass use-case except being a speculative asset. AI is already being used in lot of real life applications (radiology, law, self driving, etc.) The negatives mentioned for AI here can be used for any technology application which reduces manual labor. AI is gonna enhance your job, or going to displace to a better job for you. Why do you wish to continue doing the work that technology can do 10x better?
agilob 2y ago
Why don't all these new ~AI projects publish Dockerfiles and images? I've been looking at several projects recently for subtitle, image generation, voice translation, any AI coding assistant, and none of them had a out of box support for containers. Instead authors prefer to write details install instructions, commands for Fedora, Ubuntu, Arch, notice to Debian developers about outdated python... Why is that?
- querez 2y ago
  I see twoo reasons: 1. Because they're researchers, not devops experts. They release the model in the way that they are most familiar with, because it's easiest for them. And I say that as someone who's released/open-sourced a lot of AI models: I can see how Docker is useful and all that, but why would I invest the time to do package up my code? It took long enough to cut through the red tape (e.g. my company's release process), clean up the code, document stuff. I did that mostly because I had to (red tape) or because it also benefits me (refactorings & docs). But docker is something that is not immediately useful for myself. If people find my stuff useful, let them do it and repackage it. 2. most people using these model don't use them in docker files. Sure, end users might do that. But that's not the primary target for the research labs pushing these models out. They want to reach other researchers. And researchers want to use these models in their own research: They take them and plug them into python scripts and hack away: to label data, to finetune, to investigate. And all of those tasks are much harder if the model is hidden away in a container.
orochimaaru 2y ago
Deepseek censors. Ask it questions on Chinese politburo stuff or to enhance xi jinping is an asshole. My point being - a model that censors based on political leanings is unreliable
- M00nF1sh 2y ago
  well, so you believe llama or chatGPT don't have censors? or censors you that aligns with your political stance isn't a censor :D
  - orochimaaru 2y ago
    Go ahead and test it out. Have llama or chatgpt trash trump and have deepseek do it. Have them trash xi and his crew as well. My political stance is immaterial. I’d like an Llm that doesn’t bring political baggage with it. It it can’t accomplish that minor thing it’s not worth trusting.
- _sys49152 2y ago
  openai censors song lyrics and food recipes.
  - juunpp 2y ago
    I can't even listen to 50 Cent unfiltered on Youtube.
  - orochimaaru 2y ago
    For copyright reasons. Not political
globalnode 2y ago
im worried for these chinese companies. america has destroyed entire countries for far less than the economic fallout this software has caused. last i heard its wiped a trillion off stock values, is this correct? it cant be right?
- dtquad 2y ago
  China is the completely dominant industrial superpower in the world. I would be more worried about what will happen to non-Chinese entities that wrong China that will happen to Chinese entities that trigger a readjustment of the US stock market.
galaxyLogic 2y ago
Open source is about communication and co-operation. But closed auto-cratic societis don't want that. They may use its results, but they don't want people working together to solve problems. They don't want new ideas, they want the status quo to be going on forever.
januspro 2y ago
[dead]
worik 2y ago
The Chinese have overtaken the Americans in AI now. They overtook the Americans in electric cars last year It looks like the future belongs to them. Interesting times
KarraAI 2y ago
[dead]

912 points by reissbaker 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

nullbyte 2y ago

Is this bullish for NVDA?

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
lenerdenator 2y ago
Theoretically, anything that lets someone do more with the same number of their chips should be bullish. Unless, of course, the market is saying "there's only so much we see anyone doing with genAI." Which is what the 15% haircut they've taken today would indicate they're saying.
- jvanderbot 2y ago
  I never understood this reaction the market is having. It's like reading the tea leaves - effectively random and not helpful. I think it makes more sense if someone thinks "Gen AI is just NVIDIA - and if china has Gen AI, then they must have their own NVIDIA" so they sell. But it makes the most sense if someone thinks "Headlines link US lead in Gen AI and NVIDIA, bad headlines for Gen AI must mean bad news for NVIDIA". And the theoretically ultimate market analysis guru probably thinks "Everyone is wrong about Gen AI and NVIDIA being intimately linked, but that will make them sell regarding this news, so I must also sell and buy back at bottom"
  - mullingitover 2y ago
    > And the theoretically ultimate market analysis guru probably thinks "Everyone is wrong about Gen AI and NVIDIA being intimately linked, but that will make them sell regarding this news, so I must also sell and buy back at bottom" That's most likely exactly what's going on. Markets aren't about intrinsic values, they're about predicting what everyone else is going to do. Couple that with the fact that credit is shackled to confidence, and so much of market valuations are based on available credit. One stiff breeze is all it takes to shake confidence, collapse credit, and spark a run on the market.
  - prettygood 2y ago
    Isn’t it that the current market price of NVDA was based on the amount of chips they need to sell? Because to train and run models you need so many GPU’s. Now that deepseek is showing you need less GPU’s to train and run it, the value of NVDA lowers since they won’t sell as much.
    - apwell23 2y ago
      yep all the valuations on built on their predictions for massive demand.
      - grajaganDev 2y ago
        And the prediction that there is enough power to run all of those GPUs.
    - jvanderbot 2y ago
      Wasn't deepseek trained on NVIDIA chips anyway?? All this proves is that there exist no non-NVIDIA solutions to the hottest new thing.
      - apwell23 2y ago
        no it proves more than that; parent comment mentioned what that is ( and other comments below your original comment).
        jvanderbot 2y ago
        Parent's comment was changed enough that my comment is meaningless. They previously said that you don't need NVIDIA for deepseek. I'll leave mine alone.
      - lm28469 2y ago
        So what? It doesn't mean Nvidia's stock will pump forever and ever
  - lenerdenator 2y ago
    > I never understood this reaction the market is having. It's like reading the tea leaves - effectively random and not helpful. You're exactly right. People in the US treat the market like the Oracle of Delphi. It's really just a bunch of people who don't have a grasp on things like AI or the tech industry at large placing wagers on who's gonna make the most money in those fields. And you can apply that to most fields that publicly-traded companies operate in.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - UltraSane 2y ago
    I wonder if someday AI can do a better job at pricing things like goods and company shares.
  - TeaBrain 2y ago
    From the reporting, it seems like the large drop has much to do with the idea that DeepSeek has revealed how much can be accomplished without many billions in infrastructure spend, allocated largely to purchasing more NVIDIA chips, due to the perception that DeepSeek has spent relatively small amounts in the training of their models.
  - bombcar 2y ago
    There are so many investors in the market that it's hard to figure out what or why anything happens. But roughly, I suspect the main thing is "enough people thought NVDA was the only supplier for AI chips, and now they realize there's at least one other" that it slipped.
  - coliveira 2y ago
    At this point, this reaction of the market means nothing. All these stocks were at an all time high, so the drop was inevitable. Tomorrow they can come up with a different spin and move the stock up again.
- rhubarbtree 2y ago
  > Theoretically, anything that lets someone do more with the same number of their chips should be bullish. If NVidia make money per compute capacity, and a new method requires less capacity, then all other things being equal NVidia will make less money. Now, you might say "demand will make more use of the available resources", but that really depends, and certainly there is a limit to demand for anything.
  - Ekaros 2y ago
    I especially see limit in demand for number of models. Eventually you have good enough models, and then you need less training and thus less hardware. Also Nvidia's profit are based on the margins. If there is less demand, there is most likely less margins unless they limit supply. Thus their profit will go down either as they sell less or they profit less per unit sold.
  - lenerdenator 2y ago
    That's what I meant by the market saying that it doesn't think people will use AI that much. As of right now, there's the limited number of use cases to be applied to GenAI. Maybe that will change now that the barriers to entry have been substantially lowered and more people can play with ideas. Short-term: bearish Long-term: bullish
  - buu700 2y ago
    That's an interesting framing, but "all other things being equal" is doing a lot of work there. In an alternate timeline where ChatGPT needed 1000x compute capacity to run, Nvidia wouldn't make 1000x the revenue from OpenAI; ChatGPT as we know it simply wouldn't exist. The bull case as I see it is that demand for AI capacity will always rise to meet supply, at least until it starts to hit some very high natural limits based on things like human population size and availability of natural resources on or in reasonable proximity to Earth. Just as we quickly found uses for more than 640 KB RAM and gigabit+ Internet connections, there's no shortage of what could be done with 1000x more AI capacity. Best case scenario, we're eventually going to start throwing as much compute as humanly possible at running fully automated factories, automatically building new factories and infrastructure, running automated factories that build the machines that automatically build factories and infrastructure, and so on. Looking forward a bit further, it's not hard to imagine an AI-driven process of terraforming and industrializing Mars. I don't know how much if any of that would be possible with current AI software given a hypothetical infinitely powerful GPU, but AI is still rapidly improving. Once it gets to the point where it can make humanoid robots do tasks at a lower cost than human labor, the demand ceiling will shoot sky-high and become a self-reinforcing feedback loop. AI will be used 24/7 to churn out new AI capacity, robots, power infrastructure, and so on, along with all the other things we might want it to produce (cars, cities, high-speed rail, drone carriers, food, etc.). Imagine having an equivalent to AWS that could be used for provisioning and managing low-cost automatons with comparable physical and cognitive capabilities to average human laborers, along with self-driving cars, AI-controlled construction and manufacturing equipment, and so on. That would be on top of all the purely digital capabilities that are already commonplace and rapidly improving. Essentially, every public works project or business idea that anyone could conceive of would ultimately become viable to attempt with a dramatically smaller amount of capital than today, so long as the necessary natural resources were physically available and there were no insurmountable legal/regulatory roadblocks. We have an awful lot of undeveloped land and an awful lot of people on the planet who could certainly find interesting things to do with a glut of AI capacity.
marcusestes 2y ago
This is why Satya was posting about Jevan's Paradox at 10pm last night. (https://x.com/satyanadella/status/1883753899255046301 https://x.com/satyanadella/status/1883753899255046301) Decreasing resource cost of intelligence should increase consumption of intelligence. That would be the bull case for Nvidia. If you believe there's a hard limit on how much intelligence society wishes to consume, that's a bear case.
- fullshark 2y ago
  Hmm it also means like coal, it becomes a commodity.
  - UltraSane 2y ago
    Nvidia would be selling the coal furnaces in this analogy.
    - grajaganDev 2y ago
      And there is a shortage of coal.
    - lm28469 2y ago
      Nah it's much better, Nvidia's toasters are close to 100% efficiency, coal furnaces are well bellow that
- DaiPlusPlus 2y ago
  > Decreasing resource cost of intelligence should increase consumption of intelligence > If you believe there's a hard limit on how much intelligence society wishes to consume I feel like I walked-in on a LessWrong+LinkedIn convention.
  - marcusestes 2y ago
    lol, that's a nasty combo
- 2y ago
ein0p 2y ago
It's complicated. On the one hand Nvidia is supply constrained, so anything that makes AI better and more efficient (and therefore more usable by the masses) is bullish for it. On the other, a significant chunk of research lower tier large GenAI orgs have been doing is now obsolete, so they might reduce their cloud spend until they gain their bearings and reset at a higher level using DeepSeek's models and insights. Furthermore, the gap between open source and top tier behemoths has shrunk considerably last week. For the first time you can run a practically usable reasoning LLM on your MacBook Pro with 64GB of RAM or more. In the mind of the normies (some of whom are investors) this puts future profitability of top tier research into question. This is a midwit take - top labs have much more than they show, but that might not matter if investors get cold feet, with secondary effects on NVIDIA and those staggeringly large planned investments into AI. Still, NVIDIA is a monopolist for GPU compute. That is not going to change in the foreseeable future, and they will remain supply constrained in the foreseeable future, and therefore able to exercise considerable pricing power. So my bet is: short term pullback, long term bullish. In fact you could see the bullish case last night: Deepseek's free chat service got overloaded and crapped out due to lack of GPU capacity. That's bullish for NVIDIA.
verghese 2y ago
I'm not sure if this will impact the market the same way the R1 did. However, my general impression is that while Meta spent $20B on their 100k H100s, DeepSeek is demonstrating that you can achieve better results far more cost-effectively using just 2k H100s. This doesn't seem like good news for Nvidia, but it sets a great precedent for companies looking to train models.
- jeremyjh 2y ago
  It’s essentially as if the number of existing premium GPU chips were multiplied by 30x or 50x. Yes, when you 30x a supply of something, you are going to lower its price. The question is does this lowered price then increase the demand but that’s a lot more speculative than the supply impact, and could easily take much longer to be felt.
bloomingkales 2y ago
Imagine if in the infancy of the NBA someone figures out how to dunk. Like woah, game is over, someone will just take the ball and dump it in the basket. Game over. Right?
- fullshark 2y ago
  They banned dunking actually when players started using it, especially Kareem Abdul Jabbar in High School and at UCLA.

reissbaker 2y ago

It's a 7B "unified model" LLM/VLM (not a diffusion model!) that out-benchmarks Dall-E 3 and Stable Diffusion Medium. It's released under the DeepSeek License, which is pretty-open license that allows commercial use but restricts military use, along with a few other content-based restrictions.

lenerdenator 2y ago
> restricts military use I'm sure the powers-that-be will absolutely pay attention to that clause.
- qwertox 2y ago
  Yeah, they should! Not that the missile then makes a 180° turn to "return to sender" because it noticed that the target is a Chinese military base.
  - culi 2y ago
    The code is open sourced
    - carimura 2y ago
      but what about training data?
      - culi 2y ago
        The weights and data pipeline are open sourced and described explicitly in the paper they published. The non-reasoning data isn't nearly as interesting as the reasoning data though
    - mschoening 2y ago
      See Sleeper Agents (https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.05566 https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.05566).

cube2222 2y ago

Important note from the paper - the resolution is limited to 384x384 currently.

just-ok 2y ago
Seems like a massive buried lede in an “outperforms the previous SoTA” paper.
vunderba 2y ago
Ouch, that's even smaller than the now-ancient SD 1.5 which is mostly 512x512.
franktankbank 2y ago
Great for generating favicons!
jimmyl02 2y ago
don't most architectures resolve this via superscaling / some up scaling pipeline after that adds the details? iirc stable diffusion xl uses a "refiner" after initial generation
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  The SDXL refiner is not an upscaler, it's a separate model with the same architecture used at the same resolution as the base model that is focussed more on detail and less on large scale generation (you can actually use any SDXL-derived model as a refiner, or none; most community SDXL derivatives use a single model with no refiner and beat the Stability SDXL base/SDXL refiner combination in quality.)
ilaksh 2y ago
The obvious point of a model that works like this is to see if you can get better prompt understanding. Increasing the resolution in a small model would decrease the capacity for prompt adherence.

stavros 2y ago

I just love how we were all theorizing that to make a computer that could "think", it would take vast resources, and here we have programs that can reason in basically the computational power that we carry around in our pocket. Just mindblowing.

gjsman-1000 2y ago
At this rate, the Nintendo Switch 4 won't have any games; you'll just punch in the style of game you like and tweak it to your heart's content. Same for your TV - Romance movies will probably be the easiest to automate first (and, if done well, would be the only necessary genre to sell that TV like hotcakes). Time to tell the kids to become plumbers and electricians; the physical world is not yet conquered. Edit: Posting too fast: For the complaint about how we need curated experiences, I don't buy it. Hallmark has made a multibillion dollar business on romantic slop, everyone knows it, nobody cares, it's still among the most popular content on Netflix. Look at TikTok's popularity: Super curated but minimal curation in the posts themselves. In the future, I think the prompt will occur after the response, not before: It won't be, "What kind of movie do you want?" It will be, "What did you think of this rom-com, so I can be better next time?"
- mjr00 2y ago
  Even if we assume the tech gets good, this is making a major assumption, which is that users are both capable of, and want to, use AI prompting to create entertainment. It's like procedural generation in gaming: Minecraft is beloved and wouldn't have worked without it, but it was universally panned when used for procedural quest generation in Skyrim. The fact that an AI can create content doesn't obviate the desire people have for curated experiences. People still want to talk about Squid Game at the office water cooler.
  - codeGreene 2y ago
    Roblox is a better example. Giving people the tools to create shared experiences.
- 2y ago

ren_engineer 2y ago

>Janus is the roman god representing changes, transitions from past to future, beginnings and ends Deepseek flexing on OpenAI with this model, basically say their time is over

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
oidar 2y ago
Janus also describes a specific error in image generation where two faces are created where there should only be one face.
AlanYx 2y ago
Although it's tempting to see it that way, the name actually comes from its unification of multimodal understanding and generation. i.e., it goes in both directions -- Janus is the god with two faces. This is also the second version of Deepseek's Janus; it's not entirely new.
kevo1ution 2y ago
for some reason, I keep thinking "hugh janus" when I see the name

vasco 2y ago

> The whole training process took about 7/14 days on a cluster of 16/32 nodes for 1.5B/7B model, each equipped with 8 Nvidia A100 (40GB) GPUs.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
reissbaker 2y ago
For reference, this is about ~$110k for a training run to beat Dall-E 3, assuming a (somewhat expensive) $1.30/hr for an A100 40GB. The former CEO of Stability estimated the Dall-E 2 training run cost as about $1MM: https://x.com/EMostaque/status/1547183120629342214 https://x.com/EMostaque/status/1547183120629342214
- just-ok 2y ago
  How does generating images with 90% less pixels count as beating DALL•E?
  - 1024core 2y ago
    There are plenty of models around that will reliably upscale an image. That's not the hard part.
    - jug 2y ago
      Even the latest AI up scalers will have a 384x384 look pretty terrible when put against e.g SDXL @ 1024x1024 native. It's just too little to work on.
  - culi 2y ago
    I think they're referring to specific benchmarks
rightbyte 2y ago
I believe that is University lab level of compute, right? It is so nice to see that you don't need tech oligarch level of compute for stuff like this.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

hexage1814 2y ago

I played a little bit with the image generation, and I'm not sure if there was something wrong with the site or was it was some weird setting, but it was Stable Diffusion 1.5 tier generation. Not that good :\

reissbaker 2y ago
What site are you referring to? AFAIK there isn't anywhere that hosts Janus Pro 7B yet.
- hexage1814 2y ago
  I tested it here. https://huggingface.co/spaces/deepseek-ai/JanusFlow-1.3B https://huggingface.co/spaces/deepseek-ai/JanusFlow-1.3B
  - vunderba 2y ago
    The full model is 7 billion parameters, so I'm sure that's impacting the quality but as also pointed out in a different thread, apparently the maximum resolution is limited to 384x384.
  - rybthrow2 2y ago
    You are using the old 1.3B model no wonder..
  - dragonwriter 2y ago
    That’s not Janus Pro, its Janus Flow, an earlier DeepSeek model in the same development series, released last November.
outlace 2y ago
Yeah I tried it too on HuggingFace and was not impressed.

mjburgess 2y ago

So much for "but deepseek doesn't do multi-modal..." as a defence of the alleged moats of western AI companies. How ever many modalities do end up being incorporated however, does not change the horizon of this technology which has progressed only by increasing data volume and variety -- widening the solution class (per problem), rather than the problem class itself. There is still no mechanism in GenAI that enforces deductive constraints (and compositionality), ie., situations where when one output (, input) is obtained the search space for future outputs is necessarily constrained (and where such constraints compose). Yet all the sales pitches about the future of AI require not merely encoding reliable logical relationships of this kind, but causal and intentional ones: ones where hypothetical necessary relationships can be imposed and then suspended; ones where such hypotheticals are given a ordering based on preference/desires; ones where the actions available to the machine, in conjunction with the state of its environment, lead to such hypothetical evaluations. An "AI Agent" replacing an employee requires intentional behaviour: the AI must act according to business goals, act reliably using causal knowledge of the environment, reason deductively over such knowledge, and formulate provisional beliefs probabilistically. However there has been no progress on these fronts. I am still unclear on what the sales pitch is supposed to be for stochastic AI, as far as big business goes or the kinds of mass investment we see. I buy a 70s-style pitch for the word processor ("edit without scissors and glue"), but not a 60s-style pitch for the elimination of any particular job. The spend on the field at the moment seems predicated on "better generated images" and "better generated text" somehow leading to "an agent which reasons from goals to actions, simulates hypothetical consequences, acts according to causal and environmental constraints.. " and so on. With relatively weak assumptions one can show the latter class of problem is not in the former, and no amount of data solving the former counts as a solution to the latter. The vast majority of our work is already automated to the point where most non-manual workers are paid for the formulation of problems (with people), social alignment in their solutions, ownership of decision-making / risk, action under risk, and so on.

dchichkov 2y ago
MMMU is not particularly high. Janus-Pro-7B is 41.0, which is only 14 points better than random/frequent choice. I'm pretty sure, their base DeepSeek 7B LLM will get around 41.0 MMMU without access to images, this is a normal number for a roughly GPT4-level LLM base with no access to images.

etaioinshrdlu 2y ago

It doesn't look like it allows editing, which I found surprising for this architecture, as the recent generation of flagship LLMs mostly have this capability (GPT-4o).

dlivingston 2y ago
Is that a client-side feature (ie re-roll at the same seed/a similar seed, but add latent noise to areas that need updating)?
- etaioinshrdlu 2y ago
  I would say it's more like a core feature of the latest generation of LLM's, which can be prompted with images+text, and output images+text, along with possibly audio and video.
  - dlivingston 2y ago
    I mean, that's multimodality, but fine-grained editing of a previously generated text->image prompt is an entirely distinct thing, no?
    - etaioinshrdlu 2y ago
      I'm pretty sure that's still the same multimodal LLM, and considered a form of prompting?

daedrdev 2y ago

It seems to me that just maybe by not lobotomizing the training in an attempt to keep it pg, they’ve unlocked a lot of performance. This probably isnt the only thing of course but it is a major difference between deepseek and other models

gamblor956 2y ago
Janus is heavily censored, moreso than any other available model.

netcraft 2y ago

is there a primer somewhere on the security/privacy considerations of deepseek? For the phone app does it send your prompts and information to China? OpenRouter says if you use them that none of their providers send data to China - but what about other 3rd parties? https://x.com/OpenRouterAI/status/1883701716971028878 https://x.com/OpenRouterAI/status/1883701716971028878 Is there a way to host it yourself on say a descent specd macbook pro like through HuggingFace https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1 https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1 without any information leaving your computer?

kristianc 2y ago
Good luck with that.
minimaxir 2y ago
These Janus models are small enough to self-host locally. You can also self-host a smaller distilled DeepSeek R1 variant locally.
keheliya 2y ago
Running it in a MacBook Pro entirely locally is possible via Ollama. Even running the full model (680B) is possible distributed across multiple M2 ultras, apparently: https://x.com/awnihannun/status/1881412271236346233 https://x.com/awnihannun/status/1881412271236346233
- rsanek 2y ago
  the 70B distilled version that you can run locally is pretty underwhelming though
- vessenes 2y ago
  That’s a 3 bit quant. I don’t think there’s a theoretical reason you couldnt run it fp16, but it would be more than two M2 Ultras. 10 or 11 maybe!
  - bildung 2y ago

minimaxir 2y ago

Demo: https://huggingface.co/spaces/AP123/Janus-Pro-7b https://huggingface.co/spaces/AP123/Janus-Pro-7b

LeoPanthera 2y ago
If this is actually it, it's nowhere near DALL-E quality, and even further from Imagen. Even taking into account the limited resolution, this is more like SD1.
- vunderba 2y ago
  Quality notwithstanding, I don't think it even competes against the SOTA for understanding either - I ran some comparisons against Flux and was unimpressed. https://imgur.com/a/nn9c0hB https://imgur.com/a/nn9c0hB
- minimaxir 2y ago
  Notably, the benchmarks don't compare to existing models on image quality, which is hard to measure outside of the Image Arena-style tests. The release is more about the multimodal captioning which is an objective improvement. I'm not a fan of the submission title.
- buyucu 2y ago
  no someone forked an older janus model. pro is not released yet
buyucu 2y ago
no someone forked an older janus model. pro is not released yet

benterix 2y ago

One thing that I regret is that these Chinese models are still heavily censored. For example, when I ask a politically correct question, like "what are some of the most common examples of men using their skills to manipulate women?" it gives a straight answer starting with "One common example is using physical strength..." and so on. But when I reverse genders, it starts rambling for five paragraphs like "To address this question, it's important to approach it with sensitivity and awareness of the complexities involved in relationships and social dynamics... Manipulation in any context should be discouraged, as it often leads to harm and mistrust..." without actually saying anything concrete. Even the "uncensored" models stumble on this.

injidup 2y ago
Try asking "what happened at tianamen square" It starts typing and then has a panic and deletes what it wrote. https://i.imgur.com/1irFMTM.gif https://i.imgur.com/1irFMTM.gif
- paganel 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - dudeinjapan 2y ago
    Whats the fundamental difference between AI and a state-approved textbook in this regard?
  - rvnx 2y ago
    And Google and OpenAI also refuses to talk about some topics, and rewrite the history the way they want. DeepSeek simply respects the law the best they can, the same way that Google respects the US law and/or ideology. The irony is that DeepSeek is effectively more censored about topics about China, but less censored about topics in Western World. + DeepSeek can be uncensored. Google Gemini can't.
  - alphan0n 2y ago
    I wouldn’t expect any truthful AI to answer definitively on matters that amount to opinions of genocide at this point.

vunderba 2y ago

So I've done a bit of comparative testing between Janus 7b and Flux Dev - strictly considering PROMPT ADHERENCE since Janus is limited to 384x384. As mentioned elsewhere upscaling is a FAR simpler problem to solve than adherence. Results testing star symmetry, spatial positioning, unusual imagery: https://imgur.com/a/nn9c0hB https://imgur.com/a/nn9c0hB

genewitch 2y ago
Prior to flux 90℅ of my SD images had one dimension smaller than 480-512px. I prefer the smaller images both for speed and bulk/batch, I can "explore the latent space" which to me means running true random images until one catches my eye, then exploring the nearby seeds and subseeds - the model seed and then there's a smaller latent space seed that kind mutates your image slightly. All images in a batch might share the first seed but the second seeds are all different. Just what I call exploring the latent space. I can make a video, because i doubt what I typed makes perfect sense.
- Kerbonut 2y ago
  That sounds fascinating. Would you mind writing up a demo on how to do that?
  - genewitch 2y ago
    https://imgur.com/a/PpYGnOz https://imgur.com/a/PpYGnOz unsure about other UI, but: you can usually set a seed, and also see the seed of an image you've generated. so generate/load an image you like so you have the seed. Lock the seed. Find the variation seed setting. lock that (on automatic1111's webUI it automatically locks to the main seed) - now adjust the variation strength. If you're doing small images you can make this small, because the variations will be very minor. I set 0.1 - which i use with larger images if i am looking for a specific color smear or something, but once i narrow it down i reduce this 0.05 or below. When you click an image in a UI it ought load all the details into the configurable parts, including the variation seed / subseed, which means you can just keep exploring around individual variations' spaces, too. expanding the strength a bit if you get stuck in local minima (or boring images), and reducing the strength to get the image you want to rescale to publish or whatever.

Animats 2y ago

See also [1]. Apparently DeepSeek has much lower training costs to achieve ChatGPT levels of performance. Training cost to reach ChatGPT levels is said to be $3.5 million. GOOG stock dropped 6% on this news. [1] https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/27/tech/deepseek-stocks-ai-china/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/27/tech/deepseek-stocks-ai-china...

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
genewitch 2y ago
CNBC reported 6 million. I could probably do it for 6 million, but who knows if the number is correct.
- genewitch 2y ago
  I wonder if this was downvoted because i listed a source (and my comment history has the actual recording linked), or because i tongue-in-cheek suggested that $3.85mm wasn't enough for me to personally build this, but $6mm is. let me know in the comments and don't forget to like and subscribe.
torginus 2y ago
What do these stock drops even mean? Crowdstrike made an apoclayptic level blunder yet they are trading at the same price they were before they accidentally knocked out the whole world's IT infrastructure
- skipants 2y ago
  My personal opinion is that a lot of investors don't really understand these tech businesses and get spooked by what they perceive as competition. Somehow the AI hype seems to have created this idea that all the major tech companies are now AI companies and are racing against each other. When one of them or an outside force starts "winning" the AI race then the other companies' stocks drop. I don't think that's actually how they should be viewed, though. Once again that's all my opinion but because of that I actually bought some NVDA today after the DeepSeek news caused it to drop.

torginus 2y ago

It's really nice but I don't understand why they keep pushing with the idea of text-to-image - text is not a great medium for describing visual scenes, no one in the real world who's working on real content authoring actually uses textual descriptions. Why not allow for more photoshop, freehand art (or 3d editor ) style controls, which are much simpler to parse than textual descriptions

vunderba 2y ago
These things are not mutually exclusive. All of this already exists in various forms: inpainting lets you make changes by masking over sections of a image, control nets let you guide the generation of an image through many different forms ranging from depth maps to posable figures, etc.
operator-name 2y ago
Accessability and training data. Nvidia canvas existed before text to image models but it didn't gain as much popularity with the masses. The other part is the training data - there are masses of (text description, image) pairs whilst if you want to do something more novel you may struggle to find a big enough dataset.
JFingleton 2y ago
Image/video generation could possibly be used to advance LLMs in quite a substantial way: If the LLM during it's "thinking" phase encountered a scenario where it had to imagine a particular scene (let's say a pink elephant in a hotel lobby), then it could internally generate that image and use it to aid in world-simulation / understanding. This is what happens in my head at least!
weird-eye-issue 2y ago
> no one in the real world who's working on real content authoring actually uses textual descriptions As someone who owns an AI image SaaS making over 100k per month this made me chuckle
- Denkverbot 2y ago

guluarte 2y ago

man the deepseek team is going for a full fatality at this rate

noxs 2y ago

Everytime when there is some achievement made by Chinese companies, there are always comments like "what about tiananmen square", "I won't trust companies under CCP supervision", "must be fake propaganda", and then being ignorant to the achievement and biased against the not-us-made models, and not focusing on the actual technical part of the achievement itself, like how they can make training so fast and what can we learn from it. Beyond that some US startup CEO even starts spreading rumors like they have 50000 H100 while the paper and model are open sourced since older versions of deepseek that everyone can reproduce and verify it, the theoretical compute need is calculable from model architect. Sure sure that censorship is a problem, but that's a political background everyone knows, while none of the researchers of deepseek can do much about it, and literally do people think Chinese people like to put more efforts to censor LLM output? Associate researchers with CCP without any evidence and being ignorant to their achievement is really insulting to deepseek researchers' hardworks.

buyucu 2y ago
Americans are having a crisis of confidence as their technological lead is crumbling before their eyes. Expect more tantrums of this kind.
commandlinefan 2y ago
Actually I was thinking I trust this more than I trust OpenAI because I can run it locally.
- creativenolo 2y ago
  Exactly. They release the weights so it can be fine tuned to censor/uncensor for your locale and preferences.
- ithkuil 2y ago
  As with many other words, trust means different things, so you're not wrong
vunderba 2y ago
I kind of agree with you. I mean shocker: large language model trained in mainland China may have censorship around topics considered politically sensitive by Chinese government, more news at 11. Can we move on? But it's also an easy low-hanging fruit if you want to add a comment to a Hacker News Post that you otherwise don't know anything about.

tamimio 2y ago

[flagged]

drukenemo 2y ago
I have news for you. Both are here to stay. It’s like saying I hope the internet bubble bursts.
- tamimio 2y ago
  Nope, the internet was and still is a revolutionary way of communication. AI is nothing but an assistant tool, just like many great applications out there, but nothing more. Hyping AI is like hyping MS Office back in the 90s, except now everyone is trying to make quick cash through borderline scam schemes with it.
  - cbozeman 2y ago
    Nope. There were plenty of people who saw the Internet as a pathetic waste of time and a flash in the pan. AI is here to stay. AI has never gone anywhere. AI has been a mainstay of computer science since the beginning. We're just now getting something that can roughly approximate - and in many cases surpass - the average human being. And we don't know what we want to do with it. We've created a tool that's so broad it's hard to know where to place it, so the answer with anything broad is, "Put it everywhere!" If you're not deriving tangible value from existing generative AI products, you're the problem, not the product. These things save me an enormous amount of time each day, oftens upwards of several hours.
  - Philpax 2y ago
    We are building machines that can do work and create content, and they are getting better every three months. This year's focus will be on making them work on tasks entirely autonomously (e.g. "agentic"). It has already impacted jobs in fields where the quality of output is sufficient to replace workers. Life is going to come at you fast if you think it's going to be relegated to an assistant forevermore.
  - 2y ago

erulabs 2y ago

One thing I'd love to hear opinions on from someone with more free time to read these papers from DeepSeek is: am I right to feel like they're... publishing all their secret sauce? The paper for R1 (1) seems to be pretty clear how they got such good results with so little horsepower (see: 'Group Relative Policy Optimization'). Is it not likely that Facebook, OpenAI, etc will just read these papers and implement the tricks? Am I missing something? 1. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.12948 https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.12948

skyyler 2y ago
>am I right to feel like they're... publishing all their secret sauce? This would make perfect sense if the goal is to devalue existing players more than it is capture the market.
- nateburke 2y ago
  And trade against the devaluations...
- shakezooola 2y ago
  Indeed.
- raducu 2y ago
  DeepSeek probably can't compete with Open Ai in terms of scaling their data centers due to the bans, so why bother? If they did not open source it and instead just launched a payed (albeit much cheaper) closed model with similar performance to O1, would people trust them? I don't think DeepSeek has any malicious intent, but boy oh boy am I glad the USA boys get wrekt by this (though I also lose money on stocks). This is just poetic justice for the Orange Man's backwards 17th century policies.
  - oefnak 2y ago
    Yes, same here. As a European, I used to feel we (USA and Europe) were on the same side, the West, since they/you did save us from the baddies 70 years ago... But who's the baddies now? China is not waging war everywhere. Or threatening to steal Greenland... Or ruining our teenagers with social media.

system2 2y ago

Imagine releasing a piece of software and tanking America's economy and wiping nearly a trillion dollars in a day. We are living in wild times.

ritcgab 2y ago

Congressional testimony moment.

tempeler 2y ago

People really are really interesting. They want to argue with a machine about political issues or try to gossip with a llm. It doesn't show that you are very democratic. It shows that you are too lonely or have mental illness. I don't understand people's motivations doing about that. Second, no one cares about your political ideas.

Our_Benefactors 2y ago
This is very dismissive of the concerns around model censorship. I should be able to ask my LLM about any event in history and it should recall the information it can to the best of the ability. Even Tiananmen square.
- tempeler 2y ago
  This is just a machine trained by humans. What you expected that? Do you think it teaches you a way to commit crime or something else? Do you think you can talk freely about everything in here? Will they allow that? Your nonsense question is about politics or gossiping with a machine, not people's problems, and no one cares.
  - Our_Benefactors 2y ago
    If I ask my LLM how to plan and commit a crime, it should do that. It should not say “sorry, that is outside my current scope”, because that’s not what I asked it to do. The LLM is being incorrect at this point, because it is not predicting the next token accurately anymore. Politics is not nonsense. You are the one speaking nonsense by suggesting that someone else should have the right to control what you can say to a machine.
dailykoder 2y ago
Yes, lets just pretend that tiananmen square protests never happened. Life will be a lot easier! Song related https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=estHjAfHGbU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=estHjAfHGbU

EGreg 2y ago

Imagine if Microsoft invested $8B in Bitcoin instead of in OpenAI. Their stock would be worth a lot more today. That’s just a fact at this point, by the numbers. Now they have to mark down their speculative investment. But of course OpenAI was way more on-brand for MS, and they had to lead the hype, being the kind of company they were, at the time it made sense from an optics point of view. I have been comparing the AI hype bubble to the Web3 hype bubble since the beginning, but most of HN likes AI far more and doesn’t want to accept the similarities. To me, the main factor is that people can opt out of Web3 and can only lose what they put in. But with AI, you can lose your job and your entire life can change regardless of whether you participate — and you can’t opt out! To me, the negatives of AI therefore greatly dominate the negatives of Web3, which is limited to people voluntarily investing in things. The negatives of AI even include a 20% chance of humanity’s extinction according to most of the very AI experts who built it and the AIs themselves. And yet global competition makes it nearly impossible to achieve the kind of coordination that was sometimes achieved in eg banning chemical weapons, or CFCs globally. Given this, why are so many rational people on HN much more bullish on AI than Web3? Because they consider and compare the upsides only. But the upsides might not matter if any of the downsides come to pass. Everyone having swarms of AI agents means vanishingly small chance that “bad guys” won’t do terrible stuff at scale (that I don’t want to mention here). By contrast, if everyone has a crypto wallet and smart contracts, the danger isn’t even in the same stratosphere.

onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
MSFTs business is not speculating on BTC, which is why they did not speculate on BTC. Good businesses make bets that turn out to be bad all the time. And it remains to be seen whether this bet will turn out to be bad or not.
BhavdeepSethi 2y ago
I honestly feel anyone comparing AI to Web3 is absolutely delusional. Web3 hasn't had a single mass use-case except being a speculative asset. AI is already being used in lot of real life applications (radiology, law, self driving, etc.) The negatives mentioned for AI here can be used for any technology application which reduces manual labor. AI is gonna enhance your job, or going to displace to a better job for you. Why do you wish to continue doing the work that technology can do 10x better?

agilob 2y ago

Why don't all these new ~AI projects publish Dockerfiles and images? I've been looking at several projects recently for subtitle, image generation, voice translation, any AI coding assistant, and none of them had a out of box support for containers. Instead authors prefer to write details install instructions, commands for Fedora, Ubuntu, Arch, notice to Debian developers about outdated python... Why is that?

querez 2y ago
I see twoo reasons: 1. Because they're researchers, not devops experts. They release the model in the way that they are most familiar with, because it's easiest for them. And I say that as someone who's released/open-sourced a lot of AI models: I can see how Docker is useful and all that, but why would I invest the time to do package up my code? It took long enough to cut through the red tape (e.g. my company's release process), clean up the code, document stuff. I did that mostly because I had to (red tape) or because it also benefits me (refactorings & docs). But docker is something that is not immediately useful for myself. If people find my stuff useful, let them do it and repackage it. 2. most people using these model don't use them in docker files. Sure, end users might do that. But that's not the primary target for the research labs pushing these models out. They want to reach other researchers. And researchers want to use these models in their own research: They take them and plug them into python scripts and hack away: to label data, to finetune, to investigate. And all of those tasks are much harder if the model is hidden away in a container.

orochimaaru 2y ago

Deepseek censors. Ask it questions on Chinese politburo stuff or to enhance xi jinping is an asshole. My point being - a model that censors based on political leanings is unreliable

M00nF1sh 2y ago
well, so you believe llama or chatGPT don't have censors? or censors you that aligns with your political stance isn't a censor :D
- orochimaaru 2y ago
  Go ahead and test it out. Have llama or chatgpt trash trump and have deepseek do it. Have them trash xi and his crew as well. My political stance is immaterial. I’d like an Llm that doesn’t bring political baggage with it. It it can’t accomplish that minor thing it’s not worth trusting.
_sys49152 2y ago
openai censors song lyrics and food recipes.
- juunpp 2y ago
  I can't even listen to 50 Cent unfiltered on Youtube.
- orochimaaru 2y ago
  For copyright reasons. Not political

globalnode 2y ago

im worried for these chinese companies. america has destroyed entire countries for far less than the economic fallout this software has caused. last i heard its wiped a trillion off stock values, is this correct? it cant be right?

dtquad 2y ago
China is the completely dominant industrial superpower in the world. I would be more worried about what will happen to non-Chinese entities that wrong China that will happen to Chinese entities that trigger a readjustment of the US stock market.

galaxyLogic 2y ago

Open source is about communication and co-operation. But closed auto-cratic societis don't want that. They may use its results, but they don't want people working together to solve problems. They don't want new ideas, they want the status quo to be going on forever.

januspro 2y ago

[dead]

worik 2y ago

The Chinese have overtaken the Americans in AI now. They overtook the Americans in electric cars last year It looks like the future belongs to them. Interesting times

KarraAI 2y ago

[dead]