Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
Oh you mean yet another revolutionary breakthrough from China turned out to be just smoke in mirrors? I am shocked! shocked I tell you!
And still, the reaction on the stock market showed how fragile and overblown yet not well understood the whole LLM technology is. Maybe at least some investors learned to tread more carefully and be more realistic about their expectations… but I’m not holding my breath.
smoke in mirrors
Bone apple tea
Bone apple tea
For all intensive purposes, yes.
They may own 50,000 Nvidia GPUs, but if they only used 2,048 then it doesn't really matter how many they own.
Also, the specific GPU is very important here. OpenAI is using top of the line GPUs, but due to trade restrictions Chinese companies can only get much less powerful chips.
The other 47,952 GPUs are mining bitcoin
More like: Mining the private data of Chinese citizens.
A recent claim that DeepSeek trained its latest model for just $6 million has fueled much of the hype. However, this figure refers only to a portion of the total training cost— specifically, the GPU time required for pre-training.
How much have other companies spent just on pre-training? If that figure is just for pre-training, it would be useful to know what current industry leaders have spent, to make an apples to apples comparison.
It does not account for research, model refinement, data processing, or overall infrastructure expenses. In reality, DeepSeek has spent well over $500 million on AI development since its inception.
But later in the article they quote Elon Musk, saying "if you want to be competitive in AI, you have to spend billions per year," but $500 million is significantly less than "billions." And that's since its inception, which was about 18 months ago. So, that's less than half a billion dollars, per year. That's much, much less than "billions per year."
Also, the title says that DeepSeek spent "$1.6 billion," but further on in the article they say "well over $500 million." $1.6 billion is "well over $500 million," but conventionally you wouldn't phrase it like that if the amount was that much higher (over 3x) than $500 million. That leads me to believe the amount DeepSeek spent on AI development is much closer to $500 million than $1.6 billion. Apparently, that $1.6 billion figure includes costs not associated with AI development.
I wish the US tech industry cared more about making cool tech than marketing
DeepSeek was open about this from the very beginning. The $6 million figure was about comparing apples with apples. Just look at page 5 in the original paper. The SemiAnalysis report compares apples with oranges to save the ass of OpenAI.
In any case, even if it was true, the $6M would be misleading, as the distilled other models, so the total it was more like 100 billion and 6 million dollars total cost.
Still a cool result, but short of revolutionary.
You know that if you want to make cake from scratch you first need to invent the universe...
I think the fact that it's open source and freely available for anyone to use is likely more disruptive than it being more efficient. OpenAI had a monopoly that just disappeared overnight.
But there are already several dozen (at least) open source models?
you mean ai peddlers are liars? unbelievable, i tell you
Keep in mind this is US AI peddlers trying to discredit Chinese AI peddlers. I would take both sides with a metric fuckton of salt.
Stop using it because they are lying to you.