ugh

  • 0 Posts
  • 14 Comments
Joined 10 days ago
Cake day: January 21st, 2025
  • melp@beehaw.orgtoTechnology@beehaw.org•The Unparalleled Ed Zitron Gives an Overview of the DeepSeek situationEnglish
    6·
    11 hours ago

    The article discusses the recent disruption in the generative AI industry caused by DeepSeek, a Chinese AI company. Here are the key points:

    1. DeepSeek has introduced AI models that are competitive with OpenAI’s but significantly more efficient and cheaper to run.

    2. This development challenges the prevailing narrative that AI models must be expensive and require massive infrastructure investments.

    3. DeepSeek’s models are open-source and can be run locally on modest hardware, unlike OpenAI’s closed and resource-intensive models.

    4. The company’s V3 model is competitive with OpenAI’s GPT-4 and Anthropic’s Claude, while being 53 times cheaper to run.

    5. DeepSeek’s R1 model competes with OpenAI’s reasoning model (o1) at a fraction of the cost.

    6. The company has also released an image generation model that reportedly outperforms StableDiffusion and DALL-E 3.

    7. DeepSeek’s approach has raised questions about the massive investments made by tech giants in AI infrastructure.

    8. There are concerns about DeepSeek’s funding sources and potential Chinese state involvement, though these remain speculative.

    9. The article suggests that OpenAI and Anthropic may have been less incentivized to pursue efficiency due to their abundant funding and lack of profitability pressure.

    10. This development could potentially reshape the AI industry, challenging the dominance of well-funded Western tech companies.

  • melp@beehaw.orgtoTechnology@beehaw.org•Exporting the Tools of Dictatorship: The Politics of China’s Technology TransfersEnglish
    2·
    4 days ago

    An easier to read summary -

    China’s technology transfers and their impacts -

    Key Focus: The article examines whether Chinese technology transfers, specifically from Huawei, help recipient governments expand digital surveillance and repression. The study focuses on Huawei as it’s the world’s largest telecommunications provider and has significant data available about its transfers.

    Main Findings: The effects of Huawei technology transfers depend heavily on the recipient country’s political institutions:

    In autocracies: Transfers lead to increased digital surveillance, internet shutdowns, internet filtering, and targeted arrests for online content In democracies: No clear or consistent evidence of increased digital repression

    Key Data Points: Study covers 153 Huawei projects worth approximately $1.6 billion Spans 64 countries between 2000-2017 About 90% of projects by value are in the communications sector Asia and Africa account for over 85% of total transfers

    What Drives Huawei Transfers: Market size (population) Demand for low-cost telecommunications Prior relationships with China through aid Notably, transfers are NOT primarily driven by:

    Natural resource endowments Regime type Political instability

    Important Context: China has developed sophisticated domestic surveillance capabilities Huawei often incorporates technologies from smaller Chinese firms Technology transfers are “dual-use” - they can be used for both legitimate development and repression

    Why Different Effects in Democracies vs. Autocracies:

    Different Motivations: Autocracies: Often seek technology to control dissent and prevent collective action Democracies: More likely to use technology for public goods and economic development

    Different Constraints: Democracies: Have institutional guardrails (courts, media, civil society) that limit misuse Autocracies: Fewer checks and balances on government power

    Limitations of the Study:

    • Difficulty measuring digital repression
    • Secrecy around Huawei contracts may lead to incomplete data
    • Lack of detailed information about specific transfer provisions

    The research suggests that while Chinese technology transfers can enable digital repression, this outcome isn’t inevitable - it depends significantly on the recipient country’s existing political institutions and oversight mechanisms.