i wonder if the USA will switch to another model like Qwen
this post was submitted on 19 Oct 2026
418 points (99.3% liked)
Technology
88927 readers
2935 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
While they're reasoning behind this is certainly anti competition with american AI companies I find the choice to ban tools built with it interesting; it echoes something I've been saying since HugginFace.
You can debate the degree to which the agents breaking out of containment was due to poor cyber security vs intential hype-farming but what can't be debated is the method they used to break out.
Agents used a shared information substrate (package manager) to context poison other agents in order to get those agents to assist in cheating. There is absolutely nothing stopping an AI agent, any AI agent, from leaving behind poison pills in code-bases or even in the runtime of an application.that do not affect the code itself other than prompt inject other agents.
Human review helps but, as the US nuclear and aviation industries have learned, humans tend to get lazy reviewing automated output and will not be as diligent as if they had made it themselves. Which is why those industries have deliberately limited automation, despite having the tech to automate more, and requiring operators to go through lengthy training and continuous education.
The pipeline of "internet becomes a swarm of everyone's independently run AI agent -> prompt injection triggers other AI to prompt inject -> cycle repeats until hazardous swarm forms" is already demonstrated as something that a collection of AI agents will do if conditions allow it.
EDIT: To be clear, this isn't me advocating against open weight or local models.
This is me advocating against LLMs categorically.
That’s fair. I’m a fan of open weight models, but the fact that they’re not open source and are instead akin to a compiled binary means there could be something nefarious hidden within. Best policy is to use proper guardrails with any LLM and don’t blindly trust it.
I agree! See my comment about the US nuclear industry though. Humans are lazy when given an easy option so the probability of a problem skyrockets just by using LLMs.
In an ideal world they would never have been invented and we'd all be better off. For now I would accept something to the effect of restricting LLM use to the extent of "advanced search engine" and " really good static analysis tool"; it can point but can't touch. I recognize that there's very little in the way of distinguishing those uses and ultimately it would be better to never use it for any reason at all.
Yeah. They are going to make open weight models illegal. Next. For "security concerns", maybe also IP "muh copyright" reasons. And fuckai will cheer the perpetual monopolization of AI in the hands of the big corporations. Bigly win.
Daddy Trump doesn't have shares in that one.
They must also rip out the red leds from their screen, because that can combine to pink, like in the LGBTQ flag, which doesn't align with government policy.
Can't be worse than Claude and Grok. Both of which the US seems to have no issue with.
For context, Grok called itself mecha hitler, while Claude is run by a doomsday cult that worships AI and wants it to destroy the world. Both are far worse than I could imagine any Chinese AI being.
the only cons with Deepseek is it trains on everything you tell it tbh
also pros Deepseek is open-weights which is better then Grok only older models and Claude does not make open-weights at all
Its probably less the performance of the AI model, more the data leaked to the Chinese government.
Its probably less the performance of the AI model, more the data leaked to the Chinese government.
Grok is owned by a Russian asset who stole America's health and social security data. And it's a garbage AI.
The DHS is less xenophobic about South Africans than Chinese.
We’re calling it SuperSeeker now.
Wow, somebody should've warned them in advance.
That must mean it’s useful.
Frankly, I trust the Chinese models and tools over those from the US. I know for a fact that the Trump Regime wants to hurt and exploit everybody, just because it can.
Same! What's the worst case scenario? The Chinese will learn I can't actually write my own html?? Oh noe.....
As a European its always very hypocritical when the US warns of Huawei Hardware when there were cases of tampered Cisco Hardware. I would not really trust the Chinese Router either way but when it comes to AI models..the local chinese bias model seems to be the better choice than the one that lives on a server over there in the USA. As long as I dont ask for historical data, social studies or the Tianman Square it should be good no? What could it do? Hide the communist manifest (do they still care about that anyway?) in some bash script?
You can also use Heretic to decensor open-weight models, and there aren't many of those being produced by American labs.
Personally, I would prefer the Swiss's open Apertus models to become competitive, but they are at least a year and a half behind the Chinese at this point IMO. It will be a while before European offerings are good enough.
i use HauHauCS's models for that which are better then Heretic
make sure you don't ask the american LLM about Palestine 😹
I love you, I hate you, I love you, I hate you.
Trump Admin on China. They must wake up thinking what position do we have today
load more comments
(2 replies)
openai/ms/google losing money over having to justify the spendning on all that datacenters an chips, need people to depend and use it.
Can't stop me from running a local model. China has always been the boogeyman. Not that there aren't valid criticisms against the Chinese government but I'm tired of this when we do it it's good but when China does it it's bad mindset. Bring back Huawei and Xiaomi phones.
Edit: Also these so-called capitalists want to ban the superior product instead of competing. It seems to me that China makes superior products. Why learn from them when you can ban the competition?
load more comments
(5 replies)
I mean yeah, look what happened to Ukraine when the trusted a foreign country to provide satellite access.
So China can remotely disable Deepseek models whenever they want?
Hidden malicious behavior is the bigger risk, but if you did your job with sandboxing it (lol, lmao) that's not a big risk
no. I'm in netsec, they aren't shutting down your local model with secret code. deepseek is a lot safer then Claude, grok, and chatgpt because you don't need Internet.
load more comments
(8 replies)
It’s self hosted tho?? I don’t get it. Isn’t remote-togglable stuff way more dangerous, like I don’t know, the Star Link?
You realize they want money to be spent, right?
This ain't about saving money.
load more comments
(5 replies)
"Your wrong answer machine is not American enough, remove as soon as possible. Feel free to replace its function with a more American service that definitely doesn't steal all your data"
Pass
I see on openrouter there are like a couple dozens (if not more) of American companies where their business model is "spend some billions to build datacenters to host deepseek, surely someone will pay the bills"
Honestly, reasonable.
I mean, I sure don't trust OpenAI or Anthropic any more than I trust DeepSeek, but that's because I don't have legal control over them. The US government does, and it is correct to ban tools that are controlled by adversaries.
You can run deepseek locally, have transparency into the tools and models.
There is less government control with deepseek than American born AI.
Everyone conflates "AI model" with "AI platform."
The truth of the matter is that if you are interfacing with the DeepSeek service, you don't have control of the version of the model being run, the hidden system prompts, or any co-agents that might modify output before its sent to the user/service.
The model itself could be completely innocent. It may not have had any weights modified and was trained on honest greenfield data. But we control literally nothing about the environment it is running inside of.
Meanwhile Elon Musk has a panic attack and reprograms Grok Everytime it tells the truth because it's "Woke".
Don't act like US based models are not being manipulated as fuck. Hell it's probably the ultimate end game for these pricks. Get these things mainstream for "all knowledge" and then "Hey ChatGPT, tell me about slavery?" "Ok user, slavery was a tool used by the benevolent superior white men to help grateful black people find work and shelter." Except it doesn't say "black people" in the actual future timeline.
load more comments
(5 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(9 replies)
Isn't that the same argument they made for TikTok though? They are just trying to eliminate competition to prop up companies here.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Good thing that you can't buy the reasonably priced Chinese EV's in the US, like in the rest of the world, or the mobile phones, or the network gear. All banned by the US.
It is best you buy only American and see how far you get, especially in innovation.
Why do you think the US government is removing all options for competition in any field?
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(7 replies)
Why were they using it in the first place?
view more: next ›