3 ms·

You want to bet? The panic around deepseek is getting completely disconnected from reality. Don’t get me wrong what DS did is great, but anyone thinking this r

You want to bet? The panic around deepseek is getting completely disconnected from reality. Don’t get me wrong what DS did is great, but anyone thinking this reshape the fundamental trend of scaling laws and make compute irrelevant is dead wrong. I’m sure OpenAI doesn’t really enjoy the PR right now, but guess what OpenAI/Google/Meta/Anthropic can do if you give them a recipe for 11x more efficient training ? They can scale it to their 100k GPUs clusters and still blow everything. This will be textbook Jevons paradox. Compute is still king and OpenAI has worked on their training platform longer than anyone. Of course as soon as the next best model is released, we can train on its output and catch up at a fraction of the cost, and thus the infinite bunny hopping will continue. But OpenAI is very much alive.

lolinder 2y ago
> The panic around deepseek is getting completely disconnected from reality. This entire hype cycle has long been completely disconnected from reality. I've watched a lot of hype waves, and I've never seen one that oscillates so wildly. I think you're right that OpenAI isn't as hurt by DeepSeek as the mass panic would lead one to believe, but it's also true that DeepSeek exposes how blown out of proportion the initial hype waves were and how inflated the valuations are for this tech. Meta has been demonstrating for a while that models are a commodity, not a product you can build a business on. DeepSeek proves that conclusively. OpenAI isn't finished, but they need to continue down the path they've already started and give up the idea that "getting to AGI" is a business model that doesn't require them to think about product.
- regularfry 2y ago
  In a sense it doesn't, in that if DeepSeek can do this, making OpenAI-type capabilities available for Llama-type infrastructure costs, then if you apply OpenAI scale infrastructure again to a much more efficient training/evaluation system, everything multiplies back up. I think that's where they'll have to head: using their infrastructure moat (such as it is) to apply these efficiency learnings to allow much more capable models at the top end. Yes, they can't sleep-walk into it, but I don't think that was ever the game.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
coliveira 2y ago
Computing is not king, DeepSeek just demonstrated otherwise. And yes, OpenAI will have to reinvent itself to copy DS, but this means they'll have to throw away a lot of their investment in existing tech. They might recover but it is not a minor hiccup as you suggest.
- nlh 2y ago
  I just don't see how this is true. OpenAI has a massive cash & hardware pile -- they'll adapt and learn from what DeepSeek has done and be in a position to build and train 10x-50x-100x (or however) faster and better. They are getting a wake-up call for sure but I don't think much is going to be thrown away.
throwup238 2y ago
> The panic around deepseek is getting completely disconnected from reality. Couldn’t agree more! Nobody here read the manual. The last paragraph of DeepSeek’s R1 paper: > Software Engineering Tasks: Due to the long evaluation times, which impact the efficiency of the RL process, large-scale RL has not been applied extensively in software engineering tasks. As a result, DeepSeek-R1 has not demonstrated a huge improvement over DeepSeek-V3 on software engineering benchmarks. Future versions will address this by implementing rejection sampling on software engineering data or incorporating asynchronous evaluations during the RL process to improve efficiency. Just based on my evaluations so far, R1 is not even an improvement on V3 in terms of real world coding problems because it gets stuck in stupid reasoning loops like whether “write C++ code to …” means it can use a C library or has to find a C++ wrapper which doesn’t exist.
miroljub 2y ago
> You want to bet? Why would anyone bet? They can just short the OpenAI / MS stocks, and see in a few months if they were right or not.
- icedchai 2y ago
  1) OpenAI isn't public, so not possible. 2) MS is one of the most well diversified tech companies, so, if anything, this will be a positive.
- IAmGraydon 2y ago
  OpenAI isn't publicly traded and MSFT's stake is so minor compared to their other business that it will have a negligible impact on their stock price.
- skeaker 2y ago
  How is that any different from a bet?
dimgl 2y ago
Deepseek is not the only reason. I cancelled my OpenAI subscription because I've replaced it wholesale with Anthropic.
- joseda-hg 2y ago
  I replaced that with kagi, unliminted access to multiple models including Claude, O1 and V3/R1 + you also get Kagi, which was already a good deal
  - hnben 2y ago
    oh wow. I have been using kagi premium for months, and never noticed, that their AI assistant now has all the good AIs too. I was using kagi exclusively for search, and perplexity for ai stuff. I guess I can cut down on my subscriptions too. Thanks for your hint. (Also I noticed that kagi has a pwa for their ai assistent, which is also cool)
csomar 2y ago
OpenAI issue might be that it is extremely inefficient with money (high salaries, high compute costs, high expenses, etc..). This is fine when you have an absolute monopoly as investors will throw money your way (open ai is burning cash) but once an alternative is clear, you can no longer do that. OpenAI doesn't have an advantage in compute more than Google, Microsoft or someone with a few billions of $$.
diedyesterday 2y ago
...until they distill that "11x efficient training" again ...

lolinder 2y ago

> The panic around deepseek is getting completely disconnected from reality. This entire hype cycle has long been completely disconnected from reality. I've watched a lot of hype waves, and I've never seen one that oscillates so wildly. I think you're right that OpenAI isn't as hurt by DeepSeek as the mass panic would lead one to believe, but it's also true that DeepSeek exposes how blown out of proportion the initial hype waves were and how inflated the valuations are for this tech. Meta has been demonstrating for a while that models are a commodity, not a product you can build a business on. DeepSeek proves that conclusively. OpenAI isn't finished, but they need to continue down the path they've already started and give up the idea that "getting to AGI" is a business model that doesn't require them to think about product.

regularfry 2y ago
In a sense it doesn't, in that if DeepSeek can do this, making OpenAI-type capabilities available for Llama-type infrastructure costs, then if you apply OpenAI scale infrastructure again to a much more efficient training/evaluation system, everything multiplies back up. I think that's where they'll have to head: using their infrastructure moat (such as it is) to apply these efficiency learnings to allow much more capable models at the top end. Yes, they can't sleep-walk into it, but I don't think that was ever the game.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]

coliveira 2y ago

Computing is not king, DeepSeek just demonstrated otherwise. And yes, OpenAI will have to reinvent itself to copy DS, but this means they'll have to throw away a lot of their investment in existing tech. They might recover but it is not a minor hiccup as you suggest.

nlh 2y ago
I just don't see how this is true. OpenAI has a massive cash & hardware pile -- they'll adapt and learn from what DeepSeek has done and be in a position to build and train 10x-50x-100x (or however) faster and better. They are getting a wake-up call for sure but I don't think much is going to be thrown away.

throwup238 2y ago

> The panic around deepseek is getting completely disconnected from reality. Couldn’t agree more! Nobody here read the manual. The last paragraph of DeepSeek’s R1 paper: > Software Engineering Tasks: Due to the long evaluation times, which impact the efficiency of the RL process, large-scale RL has not been applied extensively in software engineering tasks. As a result, DeepSeek-R1 has not demonstrated a huge improvement over DeepSeek-V3 on software engineering benchmarks. Future versions will address this by implementing rejection sampling on software engineering data or incorporating asynchronous evaluations during the RL process to improve efficiency. Just based on my evaluations so far, R1 is not even an improvement on V3 in terms of real world coding problems because it gets stuck in stupid reasoning loops like whether “write C++ code to …” means it can use a C library or has to find a C++ wrapper which doesn’t exist.

miroljub 2y ago

> You want to bet? Why would anyone bet? They can just short the OpenAI / MS stocks, and see in a few months if they were right or not.

icedchai 2y ago
1) OpenAI isn't public, so not possible. 2) MS is one of the most well diversified tech companies, so, if anything, this will be a positive.
IAmGraydon 2y ago
OpenAI isn't publicly traded and MSFT's stake is so minor compared to their other business that it will have a negligible impact on their stock price.
skeaker 2y ago
How is that any different from a bet?

dimgl 2y ago

Deepseek is not the only reason. I cancelled my OpenAI subscription because I've replaced it wholesale with Anthropic.

joseda-hg 2y ago
I replaced that with kagi, unliminted access to multiple models including Claude, O1 and V3/R1 + you also get Kagi, which was already a good deal
- hnben 2y ago
  oh wow. I have been using kagi premium for months, and never noticed, that their AI assistant now has all the good AIs too. I was using kagi exclusively for search, and perplexity for ai stuff. I guess I can cut down on my subscriptions too. Thanks for your hint. (Also I noticed that kagi has a pwa for their ai assistent, which is also cool)

csomar 2y ago

OpenAI issue might be that it is extremely inefficient with money (high salaries, high compute costs, high expenses, etc..). This is fine when you have an absolute monopoly as investors will throw money your way (open ai is burning cash) but once an alternative is clear, you can no longer do that. OpenAI doesn't have an advantage in compute more than Google, Microsoft or someone with a few billions of $$.

diedyesterday 2y ago

...until they distill that "11x efficient training" again ...