[tw1984]

> DeepSeek just further reinforces the idea that there is a first-move disadvantage in developing AI models.

you are assuming that what DeepSeek achieved can be reasonably easily replicated by other companies. then the question is when all big techs and tons of startups in China and the US are involved, how come none of those companies succeeded?

deepseek is unique.

[11101010001100]

Deepseek is unique, but the US has consistently underestimated Chinese R&D, which is not a winning strategy in iterated games.

[rightbyte]

There seem to be a 100 fold uptick in jingoists in the last 3-4 years which makes my head hurt but I think there is no consistent "underestimation" in academic circles? I think I have read articles about the up and coming Chinese STEM for like 20 years.

[coliveira]

Yes, for people in academia the trend is clear, but it seems that WallStreet didn't believe this was possible. They assume that spending more money is all you need to dominate technology. Wrong! Technology is about human potential. If you have less money but bigger investment in people you'll win the technological race.

[rightbyte]

I think Wall Street is in for surprise as they have been profiting from liquidating the inefficiency of worker trust and loyalty for quite some time now.

It think they think American engineering excellence was due to neoliberal inginuenity visavi the USSR, not the engineers and the transfer of academic legacy from generation to generation.

[coliveira]

This is even more apparent when large tech corporations are, supposedly, in a big competition but at the same time firing thousands of developers and scientists. Are they interested in making progress or just reducing costs?

[corimaith]

What does DeepSeek or really High Flyer do that is particularly exceptional regarding employees? HFT and other elite law or Hedge funds are known to have pretty zany benefits.

[Der_Einzige]

Orwellian Communism is the opposite of investing in people.

[coliveira]

Whatever you think about the Chinese system, they educate hundreds of thousands of engineers and scientists every year. That's a fact.

[11101010001100]

Precisely. This is the view from the ivory tower.

[corimaith]

That doesn't the calculus regarding the actions you would pick externally, in fact it only strengthens the point for increased tech restrictions and more funding.

[rightbyte]

Unique, ye, but isn't their method open? I read something about a group replicating a smaller variant of their main model.

[ghostzilla]

Which brings the question, if LLMs are an asset of such strategic value, why did China allow the DeepSeek to be released?

I see two possibilities here, either that the CCP is not that all-reaching as we think, or that the value of the technology isn't critical, and that the release was further cleared with the CCP and maybe even timed to come right after Trump's announcement of American AI supremacy.

[creato]

I really doubt there was any intention behind it at all. I bet deepseek themselves are surprised at the impact this is having, and probably regret releasing so much information into the open.

[fairity]

It's early innings, and supporting the open source community could be viewed by the CCP as an effective way to undermine the US's lead in AI.

In a way, their strategy could be:

1) Let the US invest $1 trillion in R&D

2) Support the open source community such that their capability to replicate these models only marginally lags the private sector

3) When R&D costs are more manageable, lean in and play catch up

[rightbyte]

It is hard to estimate how much it is "didn't care", "didn't know" or "did it" I think. Rather pointless unless there are public party discussion about it to read.

[lenerdenator]

It will be assumed by the American policy establishment that this represents what the CCP doesn't consider important, meaning that they have even better stuff in store. It will also be assumed that this was timed to take a dump on Trump's announcement, like you said.

And it did a great job. Nvidia stock's sunk, and investors are going to be asking if it's really that smart to give American AI companies their money when the Chinese can do something similar for significantly less money.

[shangofox]

I mean, it's a strategic asset in the sense that it's already devalued a lot of the American tech companies because they're so heavily invested in AI. Just look at NVDA today.

[jerjerjer]

We have one success after ~two years of ChatGPT hype (and therefore subsequent replication attempts). That's as fast as it gets.