• blakestaceyA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    1 年前

    The big claim is that R1 was trained on far less computing power than OpenAI’s models at a fraction of the cost.

    And people believe this … why? I mean, shouldn’t the default assumption about anything anyone in AI says is that it’s a lie?

    • istewart
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 年前

      A) Putting on my conspiracy theory hat… OpenAI has been bleeding for most of a year now, with execs hitting the door running and taking staff with them. It’s not at all implausible that somebody lower on the totem pole could have been convinced to leak some reinforcement training weights to help Deepseek along.

      B) Putting on my best LessWronger hat (random brown stains, full of holes)… I estimate no less than a 25% chance that by the end of this week, Sammy-boy will be demanding an Oval Office meeting, banging the table and screaming about “theft!” and “hacking!!”

    • YourNetworkIsHaunted
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 年前

      On one hand this is true. On the other hand, I can absolutely buy that nobody in silicon valley was particularly trying to optimize for costs when they had access to more VC money than God.

    • nightsky
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 年前

      And people believe this … why?

      Maybe people believe that all the AI stuff is just magic [insert sparkle emoji], and that can terminate further thought…

      Edit: heh, turns out there’s science about that notion