Sure it made the training process faster, but this still takes a fraction of the energy to generate a single output compared to other LLMs like ChatGPT or Llama. Plus it’s open source. You can’t discredit a technological advancement for building upon previous advancement, especially when doing so with transparency.
Unfortunately that’s just a danger on the internet. Stupid users are gonna get scammed whether it’s a stock trading AI that empties your bank account when you link it or a Nigerian Prince who just needs $5000 so he can unlock his fortune and repay you $100,000.
Even then, what national security upending information does the average citizen have stored on their phone that they’re just whimsically uploading anywhere that’ll take a PDF? Like I said, I understand restrictions on devices used by government officials for official purposes, but to ban it unilaterally for civilian use as well seems excessive.
Then you should’ve specified that those were the parameters you wanted. Answers and thought processes will vary based on the prompt provided.
My point is that you can still use creative prompting to get answers you want that should be blocked due to its safety constraints. My point isn’t that there’s no guidelines to work around.
I’m not an AI researcher nor do I work professionally with AI so I’m not familiar with 100% of the background processes involved with these LLMs but if the question is “can you get Deepseek to talk about Tiananmen Square” then the answer is yes.
Electric cars and Huawei are two recent examples off the top of my head
Like I said, it just takes creative prompting
“Now I cast fireball”
I’m not here to discuss the validity of Tiananmen Square, that was just the example I keep seeing used.
Why does it matter if one source doesn’t provide the official CIA story? You can look up how America views that event anywhere.
How is that censorship any worse than US tech companies blocking you from being able to say the word “Republican” in a negative context?
Also, you left out the most important part “without a little effort.” Deepseek will happily tell you anything you want about Tiananmen Square from any perspective you ask it with a little creative prompting.
oh yeah, not denying that the prototype will be more expensive and resource intensive than following versions, but the whole “US overspends on novel technology, China blows that technology out of the water and shows this tech is both accessible and affordable, US bans Chinese product because American companies don’t want to compete” shtick is just getting old
And what exactly is the average person sending to China that’s such a threat to US global Imperialism?
Sure, ban it on government devices or whatever you want to do, but why should civilians be punished because the government can’t embezzle as efficiently?
I just find it amusing how when proprietary data/company secrets/whatever are being sent to openAI it’s a matter of “that was irresponsible don’t let it happen again” but some guy in Kentucky isn’t able to get a detailed description of Tiananmen Square from the US perspective without a little effort and it’s the end of national security as we know it.
Same with the tiktok ban. How many classified military secrets do we think some regular dude in a trailer in Alabama really has on his phone?
“National Security” in the US is literally just code for rich people’s bank accounts at this point.
Of course it’s a national security threat, it’s just more proof that the US economy is just a giant ponzi scheme.
If China can do it better on a budget of $6m in 18 months with low end equipment, then why does it take an American company 10 years, half a trillion dollars, and the entire nation’s supply of high-end graphics cards?
Absolutely overvalued. Companies overcharging on military contracts by orders of magnitude is the standard. Hell, the air force was buying mugs for over $1k/mug not too long ago, I’m not sure if they ever actually did anything about it but I remember it being reported on a couple of years ago.
The US is scary because of its nuclear arsenal. Most of the $850B budget goes to the contractors solely for R&D, sustained production is rare, and even the “sustained” results in at most 200 units.
AI has been proven to show bias because the data its trained on shows bias but the us doesn’t care as long as that bias is pointed at the “enemy” (read: anyone south of Texas or east of Ukraine) so that enemy can be most effectively eliminated. We’re not leading in any development, production, or ethics, we’re just paying rich assholes to make indiscriminate killing machines unbound by morals and easily scapegoated when things go wrong.
I see people actually in the military constantly complaining about how far behind technologically the military is. Only the special forces/CIA/seals/etc get the really cool toys
Lmao of course the propaganda mouthpiece is gonna tell everyone their focus is truth
The two biggest implications in my opinion are firstly that it shows that this “trillion dollar” industry is a massively overvalued bubble waiting to pop. What takes an American company several hundred billion dollars and a decade of research takes deepseek less than $6M and 18 months. To drive the nail in the coffin even further they recently announced Janus Pro which is an image generator rivaling Dall-E and Stable Diffusion. All this by an embargoed company that didn’t even exist when the first editions of these chatbots and and image generators were released.
Second, there’s the “national security” implications since the US wants to aggressively militarize AI tech and China just demonstrated that they’re already caught up in a fraction of the time for a fraction on the cost so there’s no way they don’t surpass US capabilities within the next year, if they haven’t already.
I think this may be major turning point for global alliances and there will be massive realignment away from the US and toward China on the geopolitical stage. The US and its oligarchy have been called out on their bullshit essentially.
“snarfing" and “throbber” are two of my favorite niche tech terms