this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2026
154 points (94.8% liked)

World News

56409 readers
1978 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] YoureHotCupCake@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

DeepSeek is one of if not the most popular Chinese AI and is open source and requires a small amount of computing compared to others. Its used in numerous Chinese car brands, smart phones, and even government services throughout China.

China isn't competing for Third they are leading the world in AI development and have already integrated it in many areas.

[–] Daxter101@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

Again, at the very least, no, they're not open source. Open-weights means anyone can download, use, and tinker with them a bit, but there is no access to their code, training data, or process.

It's just as limiting as closed source software with some modding allowed, but not as limiting as an online-api-only model, as many of the most powerful modern models are.

There are no heroes in the Global Powers' race. The USA is a comically cartoonish villain in real life, yes, but all the biggest Chinese data centres for all that training, are still built in poor areas (Inner Mongolia and the bullshit that China has apparently inflicted on them), and still fucking over those who live there.

It's abuse all the way down.

[–] YoureHotCupCake@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You mean all of this code that is clearly on their github: https://github.com/deepseek-ai? They release both their model weights as well as the source code for their AI. You can literally take what they have provided to create your own LLM if you would like to and get a good understanding of their AI. Sure you can't see the training data but that would be like putting the entirety of the internet in a github repo and just isn't feasible, but you can contribute your own training data to a local setup of deepseek and shape it in a way you want to.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The training data is as important as the source code here to replicate the end result. The weights are more like a binary distribution. You can run the model and you can technically edit it just like you can technically edit a binary file.

They also only release some libraries and tools for running the model if you have a set of weights (which they do graciously provide), but they do NOT release the source code for their training pipeline itself. That's up to you to reverse engineer from the whitepapers. Right now even if you had the exact training data and the compute available, you could not train your own Deepseek V3.2, let alone V4.

[–] xep@discuss.online 3 points 1 day ago

If people on Lemmy can't understand this I have no hope for the average person.

[–] chloroken@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 day ago

You're talking like you know what you're talking about, but you clearly are guessing. Knock it off. Don't mask conjecture as fact.

[–] AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Haven't they clearly documented how they did it and what they used so that anyone can replicate it? Anyone with the compute power, which of course few have. But universities could do it.

So how is it not open source in this specific domain of problems? What would a LLM model need to do to be open source then? Duplicate the whole training dataset in a big zipfile for you to download?

From what I understand you could even replicate deepseek by replacing the "cold start" with latest deepseek instead.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Haven’t they clearly documented how they did it and what they used so that anyone can replicate it?

They don't put up the actual code for their training pipeline though. It's more of a "if you have enough engineers, you can do this too" whitepaper, because they wouldn't want any rando training their own model.

Right now, even if you had the exact training set (which is a CRUCIAL part of an LLM and you can NOT replicate it without it), you couldn't rebuild the thing exactly, you'd need to do a whole lot of extra work.

So how is it not open source in this specific domain of problems?

You could call all proprietary software open source then. The UI and user manual describe what it does, you can do your own engineering to duplicate the functionality.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 17 hours ago

So its significantly closer to being 'open' in that qualified organizations can poke around with some of its innards and probably achieve something useful, in comparison to fully propietary models where that is either legally impossible or extremely, absurdly expensive.

Its sorta like ...

... a compiled game that requires you to fully reverse engineer a lot of it to be able to mod it at all, while also its use liscense states that doing that is illegal,

... a compiled game that is highly moddable via tools/apis and/or a significant portion of it that is well publically documented or just source code available,

... and then a truly totally open source, libre game.

Yeah, not totally open source.

But functionally and practically closer to it.

I can mod the shit out of Half Life 2 or New Vegas or CyberPunk or Kenshi, but not so much with ... I dunno, basically any live service game.

I still need those original core compiled exes for those games, but basically, many things I can fuck with relatively easily... and maybe if I really go nuts I can figure out how to hack or shim or hijack the exe to make NVSE or RedScript or ReKenshi or whatnot.

As compared to trying to mod HellDivers or Fortnite... near instant ban, most likely.

But also, if you don't know much about how to make a mod, well you're basically SoL in that department just the same for any kind of game, really.

[–] metermatic26@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why even have this discussion? Self-learning algorithms appeared more than ten years ago. AI is being used very effectively in countless areas.

The idea that there is some sort of prize waiting for whomever gets the most computing power, is highly dubious.

[–] sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 17 hours ago

Yet that idea is the entire basis of the US economy, at the moment.