← Back to context

Comment by throwa356262

12 hours ago

If you think about it, the US labs are heavily subsidised too. Not only they receive billions in state funding, the administration is also prepared to engage in trade wars to help them.

I think the Chinese government is backing their labs by less direct means. For example cheap electricity and investing in chip manufacturers such as Huawei and cxmt.

Deepseek specifically, is known to operate with minimal resources. The entire company has around 160 employees and every model they release must break even within ten months.

SpaceX has been awarded roughly $22 billion to nearly $30 billion in cumulative public federal contracts, the $280 billion CHIP act, and who knows how much the CIA + NSA are spending.

I'm pretty sure, the training/fine tune through Claude/OpenAi would not be possible without the army/China's hacking teams (and legal protection). So it's more than just a cheap electricity.

Supporting deepseek is just like supporting the Chinese army, no need for that. Though it goes both ways, OpenAi subscription just lowers the cost of the US army as well.

  • Sorry, are you saying that it's a subsidy that it's legal for them to distill other models, or what? It's not even clear that there's any kind of protection for models in Western countries. Why would they be worried about the legality of distillation? And what does the army have to do with distilling models? Like you're saying it's a subsidy that China protects their borders from invasion by the US?

    It's not a subsidy for the Chinese to say they're going to ignore our IP laws. It's a subsidy for us to say we're going to make them and try to push them on the world. It's literally granting a monopoly by legal force. It's very obviously not aligned with the interests of the American people, while China releasing things in the open is.

  • Same with the US legal system protecting Anthropic from copyright laws from all the books and other stuff used for pretraining...

When one player tries to monopolize AI tech and market by all means, others are those who don't want to be hooked to a foreign will in the future. I think this is the reason in doing open research, and it's likely positive for all of us.

> I think the Chinese government is backing their labs by less direct means.

It may be that the effect of the backing in both places is essentially equal but this statement is strange. The Chinese government invests directly in Deepseek[1]. Notice the article, in addition to saying the CCP is investing, says Tencent is also a major backer. CCP owns a golden share of Tencent.

[1]https://www.cnbc.com/2026/10/06/deepseek-funding-round.html

  • Ok, but Trump stated that the US is in active talks to take over parts of both OpenAI and Anthropic, too: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/05/trump-open-ai-altman-stake.h...

    • I'm not arguing about a comparison here. I'm trying to correct a misconception about China that I see a lot from Western perspectives.

      Everything a Chinese company does has the explicit backing of the CCP, at least ideologically and usually financially in some fashion. While DeepSeek may not be the CCP, it couldn't exist if it was expressing any kind of ideology that wasn't inline with them and, in this case, is explicitly funded by them.

      A Chinese company has no freedom to say Taiwan is a country the way someone in the US could suggest California succeed from the nation.

      Any public message you hear coming out of China has the implicit approval of the Chinese government.

      5 replies →