I asked it about Tiananmen Square, it told me it can’t answer that because it can only respond with “harmless” responses.

It’s based on guessing what the actual worth of AI is going to be, so yeah, wildly speculative at this point because breakthroughs seem to be happening fairly quickly, and everyone is still figuring out what they can use it for.

There are many clear use cases that are solid, so AI is here to stay, that’s for certain. But how far can it go, and what will it require is what the market is gambling on.

If out of the blue comes a new model that delivers similar results on a fraction of the hardware, then it’s going to chop it down by a lot.

If someone finds another use case, for example a model with new capabilities, boom value goes up.

It’s a rollercoaster…

It’s kinda funny. Their magical bullshitting machine scored higher on made up tests than our magical bullshitting machine, the economy is in shambles! It’s like someone losing a year’s wages in sports betting.

Didn’t donald add like $500B for AI? Seems it’salmost enough to pay the -$600B nVidia lost…

Democrats and Republicans have been shoveling truckload after truckload of cash into a Potemkin Village of a technology stack for the last five years. A Chinese tech company just came in with a dirt cheap open-sourced alternative and I guarantee you the American firms will pile on to crib off the work.

Far from fucking them over, China just did the Americans’ homework for them. They just did it in a way that undercuts all the “Sam Altman is the Tech Messiah! He will bring about AI God!” holy roller nonsense that was propping up a handful of mega-firm inflated stock valuations.

Small and Mid-cap tech firms will flourish with these innovations. Microsoft will have to write the last $13B it sunk into OpenAI as a lose.

Well… if there is one thing I have to commend CCP is they are unafraid to crack down on billionaires after all.

how long do you think it’ll take before the west decides to block all access to the model?

TSMC just finished building out a foundry in Arizona, so there’s a nativist argument that we don’t need the island’s original facilities anymore.

Yes but have you considered that “china bad”?

OpenAI could use less hardware to get similar performance if they used the Chinese version, but they already have enough hardware to run their model.

Theoretically the best move for them would be to train their own, larger model using the same technique (as to still fully utilize their hardware) but this is easier said than done.

Not necessarily… if I gave you my “faster car” for you to run on your private 7 lane highway, you can definitely squeeze every last bit of the speed the car gives, but no more.

DeepSeek works as intended on 1% of the hardware the others allegedly “require” (allegedly, remember this is all a super hype bubble)… if you run it on super powerful machines, it will perform nicer but only to a certain extend… it will not suddenly develop more/better qualities just because the hardware it runs on is better

It’s not multimodal so I’d have to imagine it wouldn’t be worth pursuing in that regard.

It’s knowledge isn’t updated.

It doesn’t know current events, so this isn’t a big gotcha moment

We will have true AI once it is capable of answering “I don’t know” instead of making things up

Cutting the cost by 97% will do the opposite of hampering proliferation.

Text below, for those trying to avoid Twitter:

Most people probably don’t realize how bad news China’s Deepseek is for OpenAI.

They’ve come up with a model that matches and even exceeds OpenAI’s latest model o1 on various benchmarks, and they’re charging just 3% of the price.

It’s essentially as if someone had released a mobile on par with the iPhone but was selling it for $30 instead of $1000. It’s this dramatic.

What’s more, they’re releasing it open-source so you even have the option - which OpenAI doesn’t offer - of not using their API at all and running the model for “free” yourself.

If you’re an OpenAI customer today you’re obviously going to start asking yourself some questions, like “wait, why exactly should I be paying 30X more?”. This is pretty transformational stuff, it fundamentally challenges the economics of the market.

It also potentially enables plenty of AI applications that were just completely unaffordable before. Say for instance that you want to build a service that helps people summarize books (random example). In AI parlance the average book is roughly 120,000 tokens (since a “token” is about 3/4 of a word and the average book is roughly 90,000 words). At OpenAI’s prices, processing a single book would cost almost $2 since they change $15 per 1 million token. Deepseek’s API however would cost only $0.07, which means your service can process about 30 books for $2 vs just 1 book with OpenAI: suddenly your book summarizing service is economically viable.

Or say you want to build a service that analyzes codebases for security vulnerabilities. A typical enterprise codebase might be 1 million lines of code, or roughly 4 million tokens. That would cost $60 with OpenAI versus just $2.20 with DeepSeek. At OpenAI’s prices, doing daily security scans would cost $21,900 per year per codebase; with DeepSeek it’s $803.

So basically it looks like the game has changed. All thanks to a Chinese company that just demonstrated how U.S. tech restrictions can backfire spectacularly - by forcing them to build more efficient solutions that they’re now sharing with the world at 3% of OpenAI’s prices. As the saying goes, sometimes pressure creates diamonds.

Last edited 4:23 PM · Jan 21, 2025 · 932.3K Views

Not really a question of national intentions. This is just a piece of technology open-sourced by a private tech company working overseas. If a Chinese company releases a better mousetrap, there’s no reason to evaluate it based on the politics of the host nation.

Throwing a wrench in the American proposal to build out $500B in tech centers is just collateral damage created by a bad American software schema. If the Americans had invested more time in software engineers and less in raw data-center horsepower, they might have come up with this on their own years earlier.

Two times zero is still zero

With that attitude I am not sure if you belong in a Chinese prison camp or an American one. Also, I am not sure which one would be worse.

And now people exchange one American Junk-spitting Spyware for a Chinese junk-spitting spyware.

LLMs aren’t spyware, they’re graphs that organize large bodies of data for quick and user-friendly retrieval. The Wikipedia schema accomplishes a similar, abet more primitive, role. There’s nothing wrong with the fundamentals of the technology, just the applications that Westoids doggedly insist it be used for.

If you no longer need to boil down half a Great Lake to create the next iteration of Shrimp Jesus, that’s good whether or not you think Meta should be dedicating millions of hours of compute to this mind-eroding activity.

Looks like it is not any smarter than the other junk on the market. The confusion that people consider AI as “intelligence” may be rooted in their own deficits in that area.

Yep, because they believed that OpenAI’s (two lies in a name) models would magically digivolve into something that goes well beyond what it was designed to be. Trust us, you just have to feed it more data!

And now people exchange one American Junk-spitting Spyware for a Chinese junk-spitting spyware. Hurray! Progress!

That’s the neat bit, really. With that model being free to download and run locally it’s actually potentially disruptive to OpenAI’s business model. They don’t need to do anything malicious to hurt the US’ economy.

It is progress in a sense. The west really put the spotlight on their shiny new expensive toy and banned the export of toy-maker parts to rival countries.

One of those countries made a cheap toy out of jank unwanted parts for much less money and it’s of equal or better par than the west’s.

As for why we’re having an arms race based on AI, I genuinely dont know. It feels like a race to the bottom, with the fallout being the death of the internet (for better or worse)

With understanding LLM, I started to understand some people and their “reasoning” better. That’s how they work.

It is open source, so it should be audited and if there are back doors they can be plugged in a fork

The difference is that you can actually download this model and run it on your own hardware (if you have sufficient hardware). In that case it won’t be sending any data to China. These models are still useful tools. As long as you’re not interested in particular parts of Chinese history of course ;p

artificial intelligence

AI has been used in game development for a while and i havent seen anyone complain about the name before it became synonymous with image/text generation