The article discusses the recent disruption in the generative AI industry caused by DeepSeek, a Chinese AI company. Here are the key points:

1. DeepSeek has introduced AI models that are competitive with OpenAI’s but significantly more efficient and cheaper to run.

2. This development challenges the prevailing narrative that AI models must be expensive and require massive infrastructure investments.

3. DeepSeek’s models are open-source and can be run locally on modest hardware, unlike OpenAI’s closed and resource-intensive models.

4. The company’s V3 model is competitive with OpenAI’s GPT-4 and Anthropic’s Claude, while being 53 times cheaper to run.

5. DeepSeek’s R1 model competes with OpenAI’s reasoning model (o1) at a fraction of the cost.

6. The company has also released an image generation model that reportedly outperforms StableDiffusion and DALL-E 3.

7. DeepSeek’s approach has raised questions about the massive investments made by tech giants in AI infrastructure.

8. There are concerns about DeepSeek’s funding sources and potential Chinese state involvement, though these remain speculative.

9. The article suggests that OpenAI and Anthropic may have been less incentivized to pursue efficiency due to their abundant funding and lack of profitability pressure.

10. This development could potentially reshape the AI industry, challenging the dominance of well-funded Western tech companies.

Literally. Al lhe said was China made an LLM with less. The end.

Yea, I tried DDG using Claude and was also extremely disappointed. On the other hand, I love my actual Claude account. It’s only given me shit one time, weirdly when I was asking about how to hack my own laptop. The most uncensored AI I have played with is Amazon’s Perplexity. Weirdly enough.

Bing’s Copilot and DuckDuckGos ChatGPT are the same way with Israel’s genocide.

Yea, that and the shit I saw on how to train kids in ballet with adults standing with almost full weight on their hips to “limber them up”. It’s a different culture all together.

I joined but I am not a TT refugee. I joined because I was extremely curious how the CCP was going to deal with this given how… uh how (fill in the blank) US Tiktok users are. Also because I’ve been to China and saw how weird the authoritarian arm is there so this new wave of social media users is really interesting to me. I joined because I’m a nosey b.

I am playing and forever willbe playing Hello Kitty Dream Village. It’s a shitty gacha game but I love it. I alos play Torn but I really don’t like it. I’m literally just signing in and collecting points. I don’t like that it’s centered around violence and drugs. No, I’m not mormon. I do belong to the Church of Mr. Rogers. ;P

An easier to read summary -

China’s technology transfers and their impacts -

Key Focus: The article examines whether Chinese technology transfers, specifically from Huawei, help recipient governments expand digital surveillance and repression. The study focuses on Huawei as it’s the world’s largest telecommunications provider and has significant data available about its transfers.

Main Findings: The effects of Huawei technology transfers depend heavily on the recipient country’s political institutions:

In autocracies: Transfers lead to increased digital surveillance, internet shutdowns, internet filtering, and targeted arrests for online content In democracies: No clear or consistent evidence of increased digital repression

Key Data Points: Study covers 153 Huawei projects worth approximately $1.6 billion Spans 64 countries between 2000-2017 About 90% of projects by value are in the communications sector Asia and Africa account for over 85% of total transfers

What Drives Huawei Transfers: Market size (population) Demand for low-cost telecommunications Prior relationships with China through aid Notably, transfers are NOT primarily driven by:

Natural resource endowments Regime type Political instability

Important Context: China has developed sophisticated domestic surveillance capabilities Huawei often incorporates technologies from smaller Chinese firms Technology transfers are “dual-use” - they can be used for both legitimate development and repression

Why Different Effects in Democracies vs. Autocracies:

Different Motivations: Autocracies: Often seek technology to control dissent and prevent collective action Democracies: More likely to use technology for public goods and economic development

Different Constraints: Democracies: Have institutional guardrails (courts, media, civil society) that limit misuse Autocracies: Fewer checks and balances on government power

Limitations of the Study:

• Difficulty measuring digital repression
• Secrecy around Huawei contracts may lead to incomplete data
• Lack of detailed information about specific transfer provisions

The research suggests that while Chinese technology transfers can enable digital repression, this outcome isn’t inevitable - it depends significantly on the recipient country’s existing political institutions and oversight mechanisms.

Yea. I paused mine for a while and when I returned I saw it had been somehow active enough to be liking shit I didn’t like.

The irony of gen X believing in X.

How did they not see this coming and have something in place? Not to victim blame. I’m just like, if you are in a position of leadership in yor nation’s security how did you not strategize this scenario coming up? Either way, please isolate us (the US). We fucking deserve to lose leverage.

Cool, cool. More jobs to disappear.

Yea. Def not the end solution. I keep encouraging people to get on Pixelfed and Mastadon.

I’m leaving Meta fully this year. I think that platform is in for a rude awakening.

500 billion… of H1B1 visas. Great work, MAGAs.

My Gen Y co-workers totally do. It’s cringetastic.

This is a lovely and illustrative example.

I posted above a few studies that show unconscious bias in hiring practices against people of color. There is a reason why DEI exists. It’s like OSHA laws. Every rule for these programs has a great misfortune behind it.

Cool story bro. Anyway …

"Numerous studies demonstrate that without fair hiring practices in place, certain groups of people are often favored over others due to unconscious biases.

A study by the University of Chicago and the University of California, Berkeley found that applicants with white-sounding names received 9% more callbacks compared to those with African-American-sounding names, despite having similar qualifications[1]. In some companies, this gap widened to nearly 19%[1].

Research from the UK showed that white candidates were favored in about 47% of hiring tests, with ethnic minority candidates needing to send twice as many applications to receive the same number of callbacks[6]. A more recent study by the University of Oxford found that candidates from minority ethnic backgrounds had to send 80% more applications to get the same results as white British applicants[6].

Gender bias has also been documented. A study on science faculty hiring revealed that identical applications randomly assigned male or female names resulted in men being rated as more competent and hireable, and even offered higher starting salaries[6].

These biases persist even in organizations committed to diversity. Research suggests that firms may unconsciously favor candidates from privileged backgrounds, such as those able to take unpaid internships, which introduces socioeconomic bias[7].

Without fair hiring practices, these studies consistently show that white candidates, males, and those from higher socioeconomic backgrounds tend to be favored in the hiring process, highlighting the need for interventions to reduce bias and promote equity in recruitment."

Citations: [1] https://eliinc.com/unconscious-bias-hiring-study/ [2] https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/1afg9v3/does_diversity_hiringdei_make_you_doubt_if/ [3] https://www.northwestern.edu/provost/policies-procedures/faculty-searches/resources/unconscious-bias-research.pdf [4] https://www.beapplied.com/post/fair-hiring-your-go-to-manual-for-de-biased-recruitment [5] https://vidcruiter.com/video-interviewing/hiring-biases/ [6] https://www.beapplied.com/post/recruitment-bias-report-how-bias-affects-hiring-and-how-to-remove-it [7] https://hbr.org/2021/02/research-how-companies-committed-to-diverse-hiring-still-fail [8] https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/are_merit_based_systems_actually_fair [9] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4554714/