Fully open reproduction of DeepSeek R1, which ends marketing hypes of USA big techs

You over estimate this AI variant and its impact on current exploitation efforts.

DeepSeek will not unseat the leaders and it will take some time before it is understood well enough to actually do anything useful.

While I think that DeepSeek will have an impact, it's going to be on par with other advancements in the field that already were great on their own (for example: Llama), I agree with the sentiment that it's not going to be as dramatic as people are making it to be. It's absolutely astounding work, for sure, but it's not "David defeating Goliath". Sadly every new thing is reported as an Earth-shattering event with world-changing consequences that will absolutely change life as we know it. That's always a lie, and that's what gets the panic going and people (and markets) overreacting.

And talking about blowing things out of proportion, I would also love if companies would start being more realistic with how they present the models. They are good as text manipulation tools that seem to hold some amount of knowledge and concept abstractions. They are good at extracting core ideas, commands or actions from natural language, executing on them, and then reporting back in somewhat-natural language, so they are great for personal assistants and text-processing aids. But that's not how they "sell" them. They advertise them as if they were a cosmic all-knowing thing that will "boost" productivity and reduce the workload of people everywhere, and that's absolutely not even near to being a reality.

Now, back to DeepSeek. For models to be profitable and actually useful without becoming a major disaster both financially and environmentally, they need to start using less resources, and that's exactly where DeepSeek presents a move in the right direction. The fact that people can download it from a repo (thanks for sharing one that seems to streamline some of the process) and run it without requiring too expensive hardware, will hopefully mean that more and more people will be able to play with this kind of tool and maybe find a better use for it than replacing customer support on their products and then finding out in court that it wasn't a great idea.

I heard from other post/forum about this comparison:

Other USA counterparts use 100% resource to achieve a certain result while Deepseek uses only 5% resource to achieve the same result.

Assuming that ChatGPT used 100 nvidia chips to achieve a certain task and its valuation was at 100 billion US$.

After DeepSeek's performance has been verified, it just uses 5 nvidia chips to achieve the same task.  Thus, ChatGPT is revaluated to 5 billion US$.

Furthermore, if everybody uses Deepseek as his tool, he only needs 5 nvidia chips to work for him instead of 100 nvidia chips.  So nvidia can only sell 5 chips to each customer instead of 100 chips.  So Nvidia's valuation is also recalculated to be 5% of its old value.

It explains recent stock exchange shock.

I use ChatGPT daily, but I mainly use it to get quick answers.  I try and resist getting it to do 'all of the work.'  You make a good point when you say, "you are giving as much info as you are getting."

So far what I see is people are proud of their AI initiatives and will readily brag about how much it improves their productivity, even if it is just used to generate generic responses such as thank you notes. One thing to worry about with most on-line AI is that you are giving as much info as you are getting.

HKPhysicist said:

Microsoft is being sued by some creators as well. 

Because it uses office 365 user content to train its model?

Microsoft is being sued by some creators as well.  It even steals some actress's voice.  

As to myself, I never publish any ground-breaking scientific ideas in open web.  The recent progress in language model has proved that my worry is realistic.  OpenAI simply claims that my ideas are their inventions.  They can silence me whenever they want.  

HKPhysicist said:

As to creative art, AI model can do very little.

I used AI to create this image for an e14 contest:

I got into it in the 70s, and programs like SHRLDU were already considered "old hat"...  but it really started to break out (in terms of hype, anyway) in the early 80s. But considering serious AI lies in the intersection of psychology, systems, linguistics, brain studies, philosophy, ... it really hasn't been that slow. Of course, two AI-winters (so far) hasn't helped - a side effect of the perpetual hype cycle.

It was, and obviously very basic given the time period.  It's crazy to think that people used to think they were speaking with a real human and even formed emotional attachments with it.  I find it amusing that it was written in a programming language called MAD-SLIP!  I think AI really came into its own as a serious research topic in the 1980s although there were initiatives before that.  Shows how far we've come in all that time.  Not!

Eliza started to be written in '64. That's 60+ years ago!

Eliza started to be written in '64. That's 60+ years ago!

I got into it in the 70s, and programs like SHRLDU were already considered "old hat"...  but it really started to break out (in terms of hype, anyway) in the early 80s. But considering serious AI lies in the intersection of psychology, systems, linguistics, brain studies, philosophy, ... it really hasn't been that slow. Of course, two AI-winters (so far) hasn't helped - a side effect of the perpetual hype cycle.

It was, and obviously very basic given the time period.  It's crazy to think that people used to think they were speaking with a real human and even formed emotional attachments with it.  I find it amusing that it was written in a programming language called MAD-SLIP!  I think AI really came into its own as a serious research topic in the 1980s although there were initiatives before that.  Shows how far we've come in all that time.  Not!