• sunzu2@thebrainbin.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Us is looking like a limp dick cuck…

    Chinese did a free market on US and oligarchs are having a melt down over it.

  • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    OT: the sudden reload of the page in a reception hole on the train caused me to disable JS for tomshardware for forever. No reload that way. And it even loads faster.

  • DankOfAmerica@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Authorities, including the White House and the FBI, are investigating whether DeepSeek obtained restricted AI GPUs through third-party firms in Singapore.

    I wonder if this has anything to do with all those high-level terminations disguised as Jan 6 investigation retribution at the FBI.

  • SpikesOtherDog@ani.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Is some context missing? I’m trying to be dense, I’m just not sure how Deepseek broke American laws. I get that a license is required for countries to purchase these from the vendor. What is stopping a third party from collecting hardware through intermediaries and reselling them to a Chinese company outside of US borders?

    • nednobbins@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Yes.

      Your response got that there is limited legal recourse, even if it’s true. The main hope is messaging but it’s a long shot.

      The Deepseek-R1 paper shows us that training good LLMs can be done by anyone. That means you don’t need NVidias top of the line chips and you don’t need to pay a premium to some company that got access to those chips.

      If it turns out that they lied about the hardware they used, it means that Nvidia and the big AI companies still enjoy a monopoly.

    • Nomecks@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      You’re not allowed to buy/resell the hardware to China as an intermediary.

      • SpikesOtherDog@ani.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I get the prevailing idea, and I can understand the reasoning behind it. My question really was trying to ferret out whether it was US laws that were violated, Singaporean laws, the initial trade agreement, or something else.

        • Nomecks@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 hours ago

          The seller and buyer both violated US export controls, which is against US law.