6 ms·
> “It’s also extremely hard to rally a big talented research team to charge a new hill in the fog together,” he added. “This is the key to driving progress forw
by bilekas 2y ago
> “It’s also extremely hard to rally a big talented research team to charge a new hill in the fog together,” he added. “This is the key to driving progress forward.”
Well I think DeepSeek releasing it open source and on an MIT license will rally the big talent. The open sourcing of a new technology has always driven progress in the past.
The last paragraph too is where OpenAi seems to be focusing their efforts..
> we engage in countermeasures to protect our IP, including a careful process for which frontier capabilities to include in released models ..
> ... we are working closely with the US government to best protect the most capable models from efforts by adversaries and competitors to take US technology.
So they'll go for getting DeepSeek banned like TikTok was now that a precedent has been set ?
- hujun 2y agoor sold to US I could totally see this happening soon
- trissi1996 2y agoWhy would they want to sell ?
- kavalg 2y agoAnd what are they going to sell? The weights and the model architecture are already open source. I doubt the datasets of DeepSeek are better than OpenAI's
- Dansvidania 2y agoplus, if the US were to decide to ban DeepSeek (the company) wouldn't non-chinese companies be able to pick up the models and run them at a relatively low expense?
- bangaladore 2y ago> So they'll go for getting DeepSeek banned like TikTok was now that a precedent has been set ? Can't really ban what can be downloaded for free and hosted by anyone. There are many providers hosting the ~700B parameter version that aren't CCP aligned.
- runako 2y agoI'm old enough to remember when the US government did something very similar. For years (decades?), we banned any implementation of public-key cryptography under the guise of the technology being akin to munitions. People made shirts with printouts of the code to RSA under the heading "this shirt is a munition." Apparently such shirts are still for sale, even though they are not classified as munitions anymore. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th...
- beepbooptheory 2y agoI am not that old, but I did a deep dive on this in the past because it was just so extremely fascinating, especially reading the archives of Cypherpunk. There is a very solid, if rather bendy, line connecting all that to "crypto culture" today.
- maeil 2y agoWere these implementations already easily open source accessible at the time, with tens of thousands of people already actively using them on their computers? No, right? Doesn't seem feasible this time around.
- hnlmorg 2y agoYes they were. The ban was on exporting the code, not having the code in possession. Furthermore it was only the US who had this ban. I am old enough to remember this and the scoffing that European PGP users had towards their American counterparts
- buyucu 2y agoI'm willing to bet ''ban DeepSeek'' voices will start soon. Why compete, when you can just ban?
- cmiles74 2y agoThey've started already, I've seen posts on LinkedIn implying or outright stating that DeepSeek is a national security risk (IMHO, LinkedIn being the social media outlet most corporate-sycophantic). I went ahead and just picked this one at random from my feed. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/kevinkeller_deepseek-privacy-security-activity-7289673454142771200-G0MU?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop https://www.linkedin.com/posts/kevinkeller_deepseek-privacy-...
- flybarrel 2y agoOh this post...calling out DeepSeek's T&C but not comparing it with OpenAI's is really disingenuous IMO.
- walthamstow 2y agoSeen the same with censorship. Deepseek is a CCP pamphlet apparently, but rarely is it compared to OpenAI in the same breath.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ijidak 2y agoNBC Nightly News, on Monday, had an expert -- at 8:05 in the video -- who claimed there might be national security risks to Deepseek. I'm not going to take a side on whether there is or not. But, it does sound reminiscent of the reasons used to ban Tik-tok. https://youtu.be/uE6F6eTyAVc?si=BLZo3FMVRvjEy6Xa https://youtu.be/uE6F6eTyAVc?si=BLZo3FMVRvjEy6Xa
- Mistletoe 2y agoNext they will say it is to protect the children and that terrorists use it. You start to recognize the playbook after about the millionth time.
- zelphirkalt 2y agoActually the "our IP" argument is ridiculous. What they are doing is stealing data from all over the web, without people's consent for that data to be used in training ML models. If anything, then "Open"AI should be sued and forced to publish their whole product. The people should demand knowing exactly what is going on with their data. Also still an unresolved issue is how they will ever comply with a deletion request, should any model output personal data of someone. They are heavily in a gray area, with regards to what should be allowed. If anything, they should really shut up now.
- TZubiri 2y agoIf there's any litigation, a counterclaim would be interesting. But DeepSeek would need to partner with parties that have been damaged by OpenAI's scraping.
- greenavocado 2y agoI'm getting popcorn ready for the trial where an apparatus of the Chinese Communist Party files a counterclaim in an American Court together with the common people - millions of John Does - as litigants against an organization that has aggressively and in many cases of oppressively scraped their websites (DDoS)
- zelphirkalt 2y agoI would definitely pay for seeing that movie! Especially if it led to greedy tech giants becoming very careful about what data they gather and ingest for training of ML models.
- IshKebab 2y agoThey can still have IP while using copyrighted training materials - the actual model source code. But DeepSeek didn't use that presumably (since it's secret). They definitely can't argue that using copyrighted material for training is fine, but using output from other commercial models isn't. That's too inconsistent.
- boringg 2y agoExplain to me how one ban's opensource? That concept is foreign to me.
- portaouflop 2y agoTikTok is banned in the US?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- bagels 2y agoYes, it was removed from the app stores, and briefly, from the web.
- daveguy 2y agoExcept access to the app didn't have to stop. TikTok chose to manipulate users and Trump by going beyond the law and kissing Trump's rear. It was only US companies that couldn't host the app (eg Google and Apple). Users in the US could have still accessed the app, and even side-loaded it on Android, but TikTok purposely blocked them and pretended it was the ban. They were able to do it because they know the exact location of every TikTok user whether you use a VPN or not. Source: > If not sold within a year, the law would make it illegal for web-hosting services to support TikTok, and it would force Google and Apple to remove TikTok from app stores — rendering the app unusable with time. https://www.npr.org/2024/04/24/1246663779/biden-ban-tiktok-u https://www.npr.org/2024/04/24/1246663779/biden-ban-tiktok-u...
- rcbdev 2y agoFrom a strategic point of view, they took the smartest gamble (or call it calculated risk) I've seen a company of this size take in a while. Kudos.
- daveguy 2y agoWell, they flexed and it worked. I'm not sure it was the best strategy when the argument was "undue influence by a foreign power."
- sudosysgen 2y ago
- tdb7893 2y agoThe fact that they are still called "Open"AI adds such a delicious irony to this whole thing. I could not imagine a company I had less sympathy for in this situation.
- emsign 2y ago500 billion for a few US companies yet the Chinese will probably still be better for way less money. This might turn out to be a historical mistake of the new administration.
- tw1984 2y agothe biggest mistake was made 20 years by allowing China to join the WTO. everything is already too late.
- cscurmudgeon 2y agoThe US doesn't need to ban DeepSeek from US The US should only ban DeepSeek (and other Chinese companies) from accessing US frontier models.
- tw1984 2y ago> The US should only ban DeepSeek (and other Chinese companies) from accessing US frontier models. The US should only ban DeepSeek (and other Chinese companies) from accessing US frontier models designed and trained by Chinese Americans. fixed for you.
- petesergeant 2y ago> So they'll go for getting DeepSeek banned like TikTok The UAE (where I live, happily, and by choice), which desperately wants to be the center of the world in AI and is spending vast time and treasure to make it happen (they've even got their own excellent, government-funded foundation model), would _love_ this. Any attempt to ban DeepSeek in the US would be the most gigantic self-own. Combine that with no income tax, a fantastic standard of living, and a willingness to very easily give out visas to smart people from anywhere in the world, and I have to imagine it is one of several countries desperate for the US to do something so utterly stupid.