Comment by khalic

11 hours ago

It's also a reminder that as soon as Chinese models take the lead, they will switch to closed source too... so let's not be complacent, we need stronger, completely open data models, open source code, etc. to mitigate this risk

Based on what? Do you have real proof on it or is it just a guess that Chinese companies aren’t better than American ones?

  • Chinese companies are literally the state of China.

    So the question is "How much do I trust Xi Jinpeng (or whoever is the chosen successor)?"

    American companies will compromise and work with the government diplomatically. Chinese companies are the government.

    Its a key distinction many fail to grasp, and hard to when you are lost in the sauce of constant American political infighting.

  • It's neither the American nor Chinese LABS I'm weary of, it's their government, both very prone to interference "in the name of national security"

How do you figure that? “also a reminder that as soon as Chinese models take the lead, they will switch to closed source too”

What specifically about their release strategy “reminded” you of that conjecture?

The premise that they only open source the models … because it somehow helps them leapfrog American labs, and once they actually can leapfrog them, they’d close source them, doesn’t really track for me. Am I missing something?

I mean I think we need our own domestic open weight labs. I just don’t particularly understand the point you’re making

  • The point I’m making is that this has become a strategic resource. The Chinese government allows wide sharing of their models because is weakens the US position.

    If Chinese models become better than Americans, do you believe the CCP will allow the free distribution of their flagship models?

    Think again if it’s the case.

    • Why wouldn't they? It keeps strengthening their position. It's an incredible source of soft power if they're seen as the place to look for good AI, and what's more, you can self-host it or hire a local provider if you're worried about data sovereignty.

      8 replies →

    • They would still be at a significant compute disadvantage and deploying them worldwide seems to be how they work around that currently as they put together a homegrown alternative.

      7 replies →

    • Maybe, but it could aöso be that they’re looking closeöy at the risks and negative externalities of the way things are currently being done in the US. I.e. bu and for the disproportionate benefit of a tiny elite, allied with a veru polarizing and unpredictaböe political leadership, while the vast majoruty are incredibly anxious and resentful about it all. China is currently ahead in all aspects pf ”AI” other than the specific niche of frontier LLMs, and for all their faults seem more interested in maintaining social cohesion (which has its own dystopian aspects, obv) and disseminating the technology and its presumed benefits throughout society, rather than ”beating the US”.

    • Not necessarily, commoditize your complement is a common strategy USA & Europe are more services heavy than China which seems to have advantage at manufacturing these days if AI trained on everybody data can replace some of it than it reduce China depend on others, increase demands from other countries to china's manufacturing and reduce their dependence on USA & Europe and reduce USA & Europe bargaining chip in any future negotiate.