FaceDeer

The model has no idea how much time has passed unless it is explicitly told what time has passed. They're not capable of forming new memories during routine operation, the black box remains immutable unless you explicitly do additional training on it - in which case you're supply it with the training materials yourself and you know exactly what's in them. People who use LLMs for coding already know they're not perfect, and they're not going to be all that helpful unless you know enough of the programming language to know what it's trying to do. I don't think the sort of subtlety you're suggesting is really possible to train into an LLM with our current technology level.

And even though it's a black box, it's not magic. It can't communicate with the outside world in any way other than the ways you provide it, and it can't do anything unless you're actively empowering it to do something.

So I'm not really concerned that DeepSeek has some kind of super secret hidden "programming" that's going to jump out and stab us. I think its only "threat" is what we already see on the surface - it's hugely disruptive to the business plans of companies like OpenAI, who were betting on AI remaining a hugely expensive and centralized affair.

All they have to agree on is that they are getting something they want, that "something" can be different from person to person.

It's not like there aren't alternatives

Things like DeepSeek are exactly the "alternatives" you're talking about here. DeepSeek provides alternatives to American AIs,

or like we need them at all.

People use what they want to use, and lots of people want to use social media. You're on a social media platform right now as we discuss this.

That's DeepSeek the service, run by the Chinese company out of China and subject to Chinese jurisdiction. Not DeepSeek the model, which is what European companies would be making use of to catch up.

It's not the DeepSeek service that's providing a huge opportunity, it's the model. That can be run locally without any sort of privacy concerns.

So, is censorship a bad thing or not? This "safety" test is really just a censorship test and I consider "failing" it to be a good thing. I loathe when a computer refuses a command I give it because it thinks my command was "immoral".

Similar to online AI detector tools

Ah, so it's useless then.

Anything that pushes back copyright is fine by me.

A local model is just a giant matrix of numbers, so as long as you're running it locally you can be sure it's not secretly recording or communicating information with any outside source. Just make sure you trust the software that's running it (there's plenty of open source alternatives for that that have nothing to do with China).

And since it's an open weight model, any remaining reluctance to talk about whatever subject can be abliterated or fine-tuned away if it's really a problem.

You are a bad poster. You didn't convince me with your argument.

The purpose of a candidate isn't to convince every single person to vote for them. It's to convince enough of them to vote for them (and in the right places) to achieve victory in the election.

I don't know how it looks on your instance, but on mine I've got twice as many upvotes on the comment you're responding to than I do downvotes. If I was a candidate in an election that would be a pretty good result!

However, I'm not a candidate in an election. I'm a participant in a discussion forum. The mere fact that you're engaging with my arguments and discussing them in a rational manner makes this a successful comment, and me a successful commenter.

Okay.

As a side note, nobody draw a circle in the woods and chant that name three times under moonlight. I'll probably be asleep, so suddenly teleporting into the woods in the middle of the night will be very annoying and make me cross.