Summary:

The launch of Chinese AI application DeepSeek in the U.S. has raised national security concerns among officials, lawmakers, and cybersecurity experts. The app quickly became the most downloaded on Apple’s store, disrupting Wall Street and causing a record 17% drop in Nvidia’s stock. The White House announced an investigation into the potential risks, with some lawmakers calling for stricter export controls to prevent China from leveraging U.S. technology.

Beyond economic impact, experts warn DeepSeek may pose significant data security risks, as Chinese law allows government access to company-held data. Unlike TikTok, which stores U.S. data on Oracle servers, DeepSeek operates directly from China, collecting personal user information. The app also exhibits censorship, blocking content on politically sensitive topics like Tiananmen Square. Some analysts argue that, as an open-source model, DeepSeek may not be as concerning as TikTok, but critics worry its widespread adoption could advance China’s influence through curated information control.

  • Magnus@lemmy.brandyapple.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Let’s also remember that “U.S. officials” now describes MAGA flunkies that replaced actually qualified professionals.

  • Eezyville@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    24 hours ago

    This is just so fun to watch.

    America: “Executive order now! No US person is allowed to help the Chinese develop these technologies! We will imprison you traitor!”

    China: “OK. We’ll just develop it ourselves.” DeepSeek enters the chat

    America: “Fuck! National security emergency!”

  • Liv@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    137
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Of course it’s a national security threat, it’s just more proof that the US economy is just a giant ponzi scheme.

    If China can do it better on a budget of $6m in 18 months with low end equipment, then why does it take an American company 10 years, half a trillion dollars, and the entire nation’s supply of high-end graphics cards?

    • tburkhol@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 day ago

      First time you do something is always harder. OpenAI just didn’t think it was 1000x harder and thought they’d have more time to cash in.

      Myself, I think that being able to throw billions of dollars at hardware, and their focus on next-quarter results discouraged them from putting in the human effort to analyze and optimize their process. It turns out there were some fantastic optimizations to do.

      • Th3D3k0y@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        MVP in Technology. OpenAI just sat around throwing salt to the wind piling up “value” until they can convince people it is worth some obscene amount of money to sell out. Once you give someone a literal milestone and show them the path, boom.

        This really really feels like a real life Tortoise and the Hare story. Like real hard, and I don’t feel the least bit bad for the hare.

      • Liv@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 day ago

        oh yeah, not denying that the prototype will be more expensive and resource intensive than following versions, but the whole “US overspends on novel technology, China blows that technology out of the water and shows this tech is both accessible and affordable, US bans Chinese product because American companies don’t want to compete” shtick is just getting old

    • naeap@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      Distilling OpenAI and Llama models probably also helped quite a bit

      Although I must admit, that the architectural changes are pretty cool

      but I have to add, that I’ve just started reading into the topic a few weeks ago and don’t really have any real practical experience, besides checking out some huggingface docs I got linked yesterday and stupid me hasn’t thought about looking there…
      So everything I say is probably bullshit o⁠:⁠-⁠)

      • Liv@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        22 hours ago

        Sure it made the training process faster, but this still takes a fraction of the energy to generate a single output compared to other LLMs like ChatGPT or Llama. Plus it’s open source. You can’t discredit a technological advancement for building upon previous advancement, especially when doing so with transparency.

        • naeap@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          21 hours ago

          As I said, the architectural changes are quite cool

          As far as I’ve understood it mostly comes down to splitting it up into multiple expert systems, so you don’t need to activate the complete system with every request

          But I’ve only scratched the surface…

          Also, open source… The weights are made publicly available.
          None of the training data or systems

          Edit: regarding “open source”:
          Also Meta’s Llama is on huggingface, just like deepseek. I still wouldn’t talk about transparency here

    • Xanthobilly@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Deepseek used distillation, which is a way of extracting training information from other models through querying the model. In other words, some of the advances came from examining OpenAI’s models. Being first is hardest and took brute force.

    • Zexks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      Not that America doesn’t have its own problem. But what do the suicide prevention nets looks like at your office. Because they’re everywhere in china because of shitty working conditions. This is how they do shit so cheap.

      • kipo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        I don’t understand why you’re getting downvoted. Labor laws in China are shit. A ton of people there work way more than 40 hours a week for less money than US Americans get, live on company “campuses”, and have suicide nets.

        • TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          Many people online have been radicalised into thinking they have to be 100% for side A or for side B.

          When you put any criticism towards A or B, the supporters go absolutely wild. They will deny any problems with the side they’ve chosen.

  • MrNesser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    You did something cheaper quicker and it’s more efficient it must be bad the US

    • themurphy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Just like EV’s and battery technology. Up to 40% tarrif on some brands.

      They are cheaper with more range. The range is literally only achievable through better technology and hardware.

        • themurphy@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          20 hours ago

          It’s true that working conditions is not the same at all in China, which also makes this possible.

          Put the technology is still better, even if they acquired it cheaper than possible in the US.

  • Fake4000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    67
    ·
    1 day ago

    If it’s open source and can be hosted locally, I don’t think there are issues with national security in this case.

    There is money to be lost though. Always follow the money.

    • Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 hours ago

      “No! Ban GitHub! It hosts the code of our adversaries! And while we’re at it, ban the internet!” —Plutocrats, probably.

  • Mrkawfee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    National security, anti-terrorism, protecting children.

    The trifecta of reasons given for abolishing freedoms

    • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      And the first two reasons are not even legitimate in theory. Nationalism is a plague destroying the planet. “Terrorism” is a fake word reserved for enemies of the state.

  • extremeboredom@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    1 day ago

    as Chinese law allows government access to company-held data.

    … Kind of exactly like how US law allows government access to company-held data?

  • qyron@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Good. Perhaps while all the idiots are busy devising a “plan” to address this, those evil brain leave everyone else alone.

  • technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    When you’re living in the imperial core violently genociding the planet to make a quick buck, of course everything is a security concern and opportunity for the MIC to profit.

  • MagicShel@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    As we just lost any sort of moral high ground, ok. 2 years ago maybe I’d be worried. 9 years ago I’d definitely have been worried. Today, the enemy of my enemy is my ally.