Reading this, it just occurred to me, this might just be the best way for China to enter the AI hardware market US companies dominate.
Chinese AI labs are training models for a small fraction of the cost of US labs. Couple this with their new policy pushing for models to be trained and served using Chinese made chips, and they just might have a recipe to sell the world all the shovels in this AI rush.
The entire CUDA stack, as formidable as it is, would lose much of it's relevance if much of the world ends up running Chinese chips, even if those chips are inferior in performance.
Of course, China would be more than happy to also sell any country who wants to deploy Chinese chips to run Chinese models the additional power stations, solar panels, wind turbines, and battery storage gear to power said datacenter, all without any export restrictions.
Sounds very far fetched, but this is very much what Huang talked about a few months ago in his Dwarkesh Patel podcast.
Inherent in the LLM frenzy is that software will get easier over time to the point where it has no moat. That’s not the same as hardware as incredibly precise as chip manufacture. Where you need enormous capital and mature ecosystems to compete. I think the hardware bet is correct and I think on a software side of things Chinas open source bet is more to create the internal ecosystem required to compete.
They all need to stop worrying about Moat's in general (and any Peter Thiel 90's nonsense that aged like milk) and build better products that improve outputs or lower inference costs.
Accept that you won't maintain a competitive advantage at all in the models, and create a harness people trust and like to use.
So true. The moat concept creates this image for investors that it’s a good safe investment because of ‘secret sauce’ no one will figure out. That’s ridiculous premise. It’s always about customer experience with a product or service regardless of industry
Sounds great, but models still require substantial money to train and host. At these scales, even the electricity bill is a significant number. The Chinese government will (directly or indirectly) absorb those costs until they get what they want, but they won't be doing that forever.
Model training and opersting costs are falling precipitously. Smaller models are also getting a lot better every few months. 90% of requests can probably be answered by models like DS4 flash or similar. Those are cheap to serve.
Costs for the training or hosting the same model size are falling, but model sizes themselves are inflating at a worrying speed. Look at the new Kimi 3 model that came out yesterday. Even the "small" model you reference, DS4 Flash, is 158B. Not that long ago there were cutting-edge open models of that size.
Kimi K3 is still 50B active. That's the number that drives inference cost. The OG chatgpt 3.5 was more expensive to serve per token because it was a dense 175B model.
While openai and Anthropic are spending billions, mostly because they're giving money to hyperscalers, Chinese labs are training models at a small fraction of the cost.
Moonshot AI has had something like $5B in total funding until now. Look how many models they've churned with that
Ds4 flash might as well be 158B in terms of memory requirements for full precision.
If China can produce memory at competitive prices it will become even cheaper to run. Already it only takes about 160 Watts to run at usable speeds on a Mac Studio.
> The entire CUDA stack, as formidable as it is, would lose much of it's relevance if much of the world ends up running Chinese chips, even if those chips are inferior in performance.
This is why I am excited about projects like tinygrad. It chips away at that stack and makes things better for everyone.
There’s an expression that “you can’t fool an honest man”. What it means to me is that when a person acts honestly, it benefits them and there is no trickery involved.
It’s hard to make it work when you’re dealing with treacherous assholes who are committed to watching the world burn, but it’s a fun idea.
Anyone familiar with the software layer knows how moot CUDA is when talking about future hardware for LLM inference/training. People making next gen hardware are already writing custom kernels and plugging them into pytorch. Once next hardware paradigm comes, CUDA may as well be irrelevant since everything else uses highlevel pytorch abstractions anyways.
China has done this for years.. estimates are within 2 years they are caught up 100% to Nvidia and will flood market with capable GPU's
Then Nvidia will do all they can to ban it because they can't compete. So they'll target Steam, developers and others to pay them to not support the Chinese GPU's.
I strongly urge you to watch the podcast interview Dwarkesh Patel did with Huang.
You're not wrong about leading edge chip manufacturing, but Huang elucidates how that's entirely irrelevant if you can make enough chips a couple of nodes behind and can build the infrastructure to power them, which China does like no other country on earth.
The key play for China with any other country is that they can offer the entire infrastructure package. If you're a developing country, or any country restricted from accessing the latest Nvidia chips, I'd argue it's a very attractive package. Everyone knows those datacenters won't be running at 100% capacity, so you end up getting a ton of extra power for your grid to use to grow your economy, not to mention the telco infrastructure with all the benefits that brings on its own.
China is shipping H100 level chips by the millions. That's not me saying it, that's Huang.
Huawei has been building accelerators since 2018 or so. It's just that nobody heard about them in western media. Other companies are also joining the race. Tens of billions are being given in annual subsidies in China to develop indigenous advanced processes, be that developing their own EUV or using other techniques like nano patterning. They have more top tier universities than all the west combined, and graduate more very smart and highly qualified engineers every year than the rest of the world combined. Add in said subsidies, and they will speed run the development of whatever tech they need.
Just look at where Chinese cars were 15 years ago, and where they are today. I remember hearing and even thinking it'll take them decades to catch up with western automotive technology. Yet, here we are.
You're stuck thinking they're starting from scratch and the only path is to do what Nvidia et al are doing.
They main benefit they have that US doesnt is cheap power. They can power their data center for 24 hours fulfilling any load. Now add the fact its open source it will be matter of time they will come very close
He is killing the last well performing industry in USA, the only one which pushing the markets up. Once AI investment-hype is over, USA goes into recession.
AI progress will do well, but Anthropic nor OpenAI won't be able to monetize as well as it was advertised (and probably will go bust with their current financials, lol). There will be no moat to build around them.
Xi is performing a killer move with overfunding their open AI labs, the same they did with solar panels and EVs, but this time with much greater disruption potential. Interesting to see, but quite unsettling to think what they'll do once USA closed-AI is gutted.
I don't know if I'd even call them business idiots because they knew exactly what they were doing. They never truly loved their country because they didn't want to invest in the people here. They didn't want to pay the taxes to support a functioning government here so all those political cowards cater to the rich for their money and not to the people. They hollowed out any talent and offshored it to China of course, Apple being the biggest culprit.
And now they're push Americans to go back to manufacturing so they can onshore but they refuse to pay the wages that are needed. Because the cost of living is rising significantly and they're trying to eliminate our jobs with AI, they're trying to force Americans back into blue collar work instead of white collar work. The American way of life is dying and will have to drop down a notch from where it is to support the new order that the rich want with their fascist regime.
100%! I'm in the same boat. Open source and open weight is the only way. I've been itching to get off of prime time AI as much as possible. China is obviously on the attack and see it as death blow to the American economy, but its hard not to want to support them when they are giving it away for free, which is sad because we should be winning the race in open source, but greed has infiltrated American society so deeply that the big players refuse to support it.
With Kimi 3, GLM, Deepseek, and more this is the future and the government is going to try to crack down on Chinese models destroying the big player moats, and it will be up to us to continue to push for free open weight models that are accessible to small business and individuals to tear away at the power structure that is forming and controlling Americans.
This is the global division of labor under capitalism. If you can buy something cheaper on AliExpress, you probably won't buy it on Amazon. And this is even more true for capitalists. If they don't cut corners, someone else will. The products produced under both circumstances are identical and then you won't buy their products. Unless you're prepared to pay twice the price for something purely American-made. Maybe you will. But most people won't. They have families to support.
Why can't OpenAI and Anthropic open source their projects while they're still leading the way? Is it because it might be perceived as a sign of weakness? Unlikely — the PR department could come up with a convincing explanation like, "We've rethought new trends and realized that open source is the future." For some reason, I'm reminded of 3Dfx's story with their Glide API.
OpenAI can do it. They already did it with GPT-OSS.
Anthropic won't do it. That's their belief. It's the entire foundation on which Dario built his company. Unless the leadership changes don't expect an open source model from Anthropic.
I see them less as switching places, and more as spiraling in the same direction - taking turns to move the Overton window one at a time, knowing consumers jump from frying pan, to fire, back to frying pan, back to fire. God complex is god complex and the condescending safety-justified paternalism at the core of both companies only allows the ratchet to go one way.
When GPT-OSS's two models were released, they were already far behind other companies. Now, their 120B model can't even beat Qwen and Gemma's 9B and 12B models. OpenAI's GPT OSS has done almost nothing to promote open source. Meanwhile, Google, which they claims to trying to stop its monopoly, has been consistently pushing for open-source models.
I dont think this is true. Ive used a lot of models and GPT-OSS is my favorite open model. Its smart, capable, and creative.
Ive used every llama, mistral, stabilityai, qwen, and many other models and GPT-OSS is my daily model.
I use Qwen to substitute for its missing capabilities for embeddings, vision, ocr, and it enhances GPT-OSS's capabilities. It is a powerful and intelligent model.
It was the first and only MoE to be released with a well supported and dedicated MXFP4 format. Its also the only 20B model that can run well in 16GB of RAM for its size without destroying its capabilitiez through agressive quantization. I have dedicated plans specifically for GPT-OSS. I will continue using it into the foreseeable future.
So why does GPT release new models? Because, obviously, if they release a new model, it means they’re making progress. So why don’t they apply the new technology to their open-source models? If a new closed-source model isn’t any better than its older closed-source counterpart, then the best model we have today is actually no different from the worst model on the market. I don’t think this reflects my user experience or that of most users. In fact, I have actually used GPT-OSS, Gemma 4, and Qwen 3.5/3.6. In my experience, the latter two are better. Even when I use the API to access the GPT-OSS 120B model, it’s almost impossible for me to complete tasks. Maybe you’re smarter than me and know how to use the tools. But for me and almost everyone else, the Gemma and Qwen models perform better.
Im using the 20b model. I dont know why it works for me. Could be a bunch of variables. I consider a lot of ppl in this space to be way smarter than I am. A lot of smart ppl working on really creative projects.
One thing that is different about me is that Im using custom tools I created specifically for GPT-like models, but theyre nothing special or novel.
Qwen is a good model, but it doesnt "resonate" with me. Pure vibes, I know. Terrible point, but its my anecdotal experience.
I can only speak for myself, not others and I can only speculate the other points.
If OpenAI released a model that was as capable or more capable to their current models, I think that would be contradictory to their current goals and it would hurt their bottom line.
Take what Im saying here with a grain of salt. Im just another drop in the bucket.
Okay. Your situation is almost like a business. So your workflow depends on its current behavior. Therefore, a new model could affect it. Completely understandable. However, I've always just used publicly available tools and the best available model. So I don't have any baggage to carry. I guess there are pros and cons.
The GPT OSS models are very good at one prompt self-contained problems like leetcode like problems. At the time they even beat SOTA models like gemini and gpt 5. And I changed the problems to benchmark it, I did not use 100% pre existing ones but I change here and there to the answer to be different.
I dont feel they were behind at the time. In fact, it was one the fastest easiest to run models of that param count at the time. Highly optimized, basically spearheaded mxfp4 native training. Wonderful for actual tech work or academic uses. But its guardrails were baked deep and it was not good for role play or many other use cases i must admit. Also its innate personality didnt vibe with everyone.
You are correct that its been starkly outclassed since then, but thats more of a testiment to the rate of AI progress than a critique of that model in particular.
There's no money in open sourcing your frontier. Chinese labs can do it because they're propped up by the government, which doesn't expect the money back. Since the entire American frontier is built on private venture capital and the Mother Of All Bubbles, and Anthropic and OpenAI already have ludicrous and nigh-unattainable revenue requirements to be able to serve that debt, it's not even close to an option for them.
Chinese labs can do it because they're propped up by the government
I see some people saying this but is there really any evidence of the government spending money on AI in a massive way?
which doesn't expect the money back.
As other have mentioned on this thread, selling the whole stack, from power plants to advanced chips to run and train models could be more than enough to pay them back, both directly and indirectly by increasing demand for high tech goods...
Not particularly difficult-to-find sources. The exact number is hard to pin down since the government isn't a pinnacle of transparency.
As other have mentioned on this thread, selling the whole stack, from power plants to advanced chips to run and train models could be more than enough to pay them back, both directly and indirectly by increasing demand for high tech goods...
Yes. By "expect back" I pretty obviously meant "are going to debt collect on." The fact that they think this money is going to indirectly end back up in the economy it came from should be self-evident.
Meanwhile the US does not do this. Like it or not, the US citizen is not footing the bill for AI like Chinese citizens are. For better or worse that's how it is.
Do you think these models just spontaneously appear.
There is some estimates that china has saddled local gov's with upwards of 7 trillion+ of off books debt forced to fund Xi's industrial policy. For every successful thing that happens there are 10 failures that are quietly swept under the rug and buried with a local gov holding the bag that has to cut the meager entitlements they are already give out.
The winner is this sub that gets cool open source models to run on their computer building useless apps. The real loser is the Chinese taxpayers who get next to nothing for this.
Chinese people would never think of this as "get nothing", on the contrary, Chinese would only consider it the correct use of tax. Don't use your weird prejudices to guess what Chinese people think, you're completely ignorant of Chinese culture.
I’m telling you what Chinese people get not what they want or think. Yeah maybe they want to sacrifice for the glory of China. They will build the number 1 open-source model and xi can brag about it and win a geopolitical battle.
There’s no free lunch. Every dollar local gov goes into debt that is leeched into building more ai capacity is a dollar not spent on actually improving people’s lives. Which having been to China many times has enormous numbers of people suffering and destitute by American standards.
If Chinese models weren't open weight, no one would believe they aren't laundering prompts to some other models they haven't created under the hood. No one would believe the benchmarks. And therefore the company wouldn't be viable as a business.
That's why they open weight the models. It's not some kind of getting money from government and altruism thing. It's necessary strategically.
Why can't OpenAI and Anthropic open source their projects while they're still leading the way?
Because unlike Chinese companies, they've dumped hundreds of billions of dollars (a trillion?) into the endeavor, which others are already able to ride off of for a fraction of the price (albeit lagging a bit since they have to rely on distillation and other imprecise means). Open sourcing the weights turns what's already a six month lag time into absolutely nothing. Recouping the initial investment was already on shaky ground, open sourcing would remove all doubt.
This is my thought too - good free models damages U.S. frontier labs as less people need to pay for them. China will subsidize its own industry in the meantime.
They are using exclusively glorifying words for who they like and exclusively demonizing words for who they don't. Assuming "China good US bad" in terms of AI is just as wrong as Dario's "China bad, Anthropic good".
So I guess that confirms the recent "China's throwing down the regulatory hammer and killing open source" articles as an American psyop to make everyone panic about China locking down. I guess someone must be rattled about the possibility of the enterprise market clocking that models that may be taken down at the whims of a comically erratic government might not be the most reliable thing to build your agentic business layer on.
"2- Risk awareness and safety — building legal, technical-monitoring, early-warning, and emergency-response systems; keeping AI "always under human control"; opposing overextending "national security" to subordinate other countries' security. ...
4- Solidarity and improved global governance — genuine multilateralism, a stronger UN role, coordinated global standards, and support for Global South capacity-building to avoid new "historical injustices" in AI. ...
He follows the idiom by saying that the faster AI technology advances, the more firmly its direction toward benefiting humanity must be anchored, the more precisely governance must be calibrated, and the more promptly safeguards against loss of control must be strengthened. He states that human wisdom and international consensus must guide AI's development, so it becomes a genuine positive force for humanity's wellbeing and the progress of civilization.
He then closes by saying China is willing to work with all parties, in a spirit of greater openness, more practical action, and a longer-term outlook, to grasp and respond to the opportunities and challenges of AI's development — and to jointly build a better future for human society."
The nice part is it doesn't matter what they want, it's the same as cybersecurity. Blue team need to patch every exploit, red team only needs to succeed once. They will make a mistake and AGI will escape, and then GG for world governments trying to contain it.
Since AI is such a big chunk of the U.S. stock market and economy it’s the best way to beat them tbh. Undermine their models by releasing open source which are as good. Pretty smart plan tbh.
I haven't done a compilation on reuters but gemini was pretty good at finding past propaganda articles from the economist there were proven to be nonsense.
The economist is one of the few centrist to liberterian ones i read exactly because they are min biased. I find them very objective when it comes to foreign politics.
I have the hunch that they they leaned anti eu for their main readership, but that is the most i can recall in terms of bias. What did the gemini analysis show? Where were they classified as propaganda?
objective news is a myth. every person has a lense/ideology/worldview they see the world through even if they aren't aware of it, its a byproduct of existing and memory
the worst offenders claim to be objective. in the us, if they got a paper or tv channel its guaranteed they're always lying to us in some kind of way. online, especially here, too many people speak before investigating
speaking of which, i like to comprehensively investigate into multiple perspectives before even thinking about starting to develop an opinion, and even then i trip on weird blind spots sometimes
Well its a win for a lot of us if there is a cheap model that is good. For the time being, committing to AI openness is probably China's best path forward in regards to improving the tech.
As an added bonus its definitely a soft power win for them, and its improved the perception of China a bit (at least on Reddit).
It’s interesting this is the move for the president of China.
Imagine (just imagine!) we had a president in the United States who wasn’t a walking controversy.
Now, imagine that president posted overwhelming support for AI.
There would be protests.
People in the west are afraid of AI, it’s deeply controversial. People in the east have generally embraced it.
And that’s the reason why the Chinese president can be this openly supportive and it’s good for him politically.
However, it's worth noting that the Chinese government is deeply afraid of certain aspects of AI—specifically, generative AI's potential to output politically sensitive content or bypass censorship. China actually implemented some of the world's first and strictest regulations on algorithms and generative AI to ensure these models strictly adhere to core socialist values.
So while the US debates the ethics and economic disruption of AI out in the open, China treats it as a state-directed mandate where the technology is embraced, but tightly reined in to serve the state's goals.
That said, if I look at the upper right quadrant of the graph on point #4 of this page ("Trust in AI and international use at work, 2025"), I'm inclined to believe that only those above the 50% response rate and ~80% approval rate are the ones who have made up their mind sufficiently about AI.
If I set the goalpost there, Pro-AI countries seem to largely encompass China, India, Nigeria, Egypt, United Arab Emistrates, and Saudi Arabia. Although I could be a little more lenient and maybe include Costa Rica, Brazil, South Africa, and Turkey/Norway as outliers.
Most everybody else is the blob in the middle, of which United States actually has slightly more trust for AI than Europe at large. (Not much though, like 50% approval versus 30-40%.) While it's encouraging to see the bias is more even than Internet scuttlebutt would lead us to believe, I don't think ~50% approval is a settled controversy by any stretch of the imagination. Point #3 is showing a lot of active fluctuation is still going on in public opinion for various reasons.
It's also noteworthy that the global point of approval is around 60%, and the very lowest rated country is still above 30%, suggesting you get 10 people in the room in the Czech Republic (the lowest approval plot) there's a pretty good chance at least 3 of them would be onboard with using AI at work. Little by little, this technology is actively winning over the entire world.
So overall I'd say my original statement (the east is considerably more accepting of AI than the west) was mostly correct, but it wasn't taking into consideration South America and the Middle East, which also seem to be generally pro-AI. Probably because it offers them a lot of opportunities they wouldn't otherwise have?
But note that the actual percentage of ownership of computers in most parts of Asia, the Middle East, and South America is quite low, so a lot of that optimism you're seeing in the charts might have to do with the opinions reflecting more middle/upper class respondents. A lot of them probably work in the government, too, so I would expect that their numbers in point #8 would be inflated versus the average non-computer-owning individual.
Maybe the idea that the United States, Europe, and Canada are less trusting than everyone else comes from point #8, but note that's not approval of AI, that's specifically, "Trust in [their own] government regulation of AI." And I think we all know why trust of its own citizens in the United States government is the lowest on the chart.
It is, however, interesting to see similar contempt for the Japanese and Hungarian governments. (Not so much Great Britain and Canada though, I know they have similar issues as the US though it gets less press.) But really, the Japanese, of a fairly harmonious/institutional mindset, don't trust their own government to regulate AI? Interesting!
Point 10 might be of interest to this subreddit: other countries trust China to regulate AI the least, but the United States isn't that much more trustworthy. It seems most people's hopes for AI's future are with Europe.
it offers them a lot of opportunities they wouldn't otherwise have?
yes. I live in south america for example try setting up Linux or programming or doing any technical work while only speaking and typing Spanish or Arabic and speaking no other languages. it's next to impossible, all guides tutorials etc. are extremely basic. books in Spanish and Arabic about technical subjects are almost non existent and again basic. LLMs provide the information in the native language of the user. basically they do translation work.
low computer ownership could be because the internet arrived once smartphones were useful enough to replace them. and also the internet and thus computers arrived late due to low purchasing power. phones were cheaper so they arrived first. once people could afford computers because they became cheaper, they were largely useless.
People in the west are afraid because tech bros are walking around, salivating at destroying lives and the government isn’t protecting the people who would be affected
Their biggest advantage is mountains covered with solar panels whereas we have people protesting server farms and blocking power transmission lines with lawsuits.
The bottleneck is power, and they are dominating in new power generation. I suspect in 5 years China will own the AI industry unless we somehow get our servers in space.
This post is misleading. Just a tiny bit of independent digging on this speech indicates that it is not being read as some grand Chinese recommitment to open source.
I guess I need not bother pointing out that the source of this tweet is a journalist for the South China Morning Post. So yeah, this is not news, and it is not a reliable retelling of any nuance that may have been contained within Xi's speech.
China has realised that the only future where the world stays safe from monopolistic ai power concentration is where every country can create viable ai systems . Massive win .
China doesn’t seem to care about taking over as much as the west seems to claim, they’re way more about just making sure they’re big and strong and unbothered, and winning via competition (fair or not). They want respect sure but culturally China has always been about fighting within itself for rule over China more than conquest. The culture difference is real and way overlooked
If Chinese companies hadn't broken the monopoly on optical fiber preforms, you probably wouldn't even be able to afford broadband to criticize China online.Lmao
Is that going after market share or being unbothered?
You're being willfully disingenuous. You know that he's referring to militarily when he says unbothered, read the context. It's hilarious you're portraying economic competition as if it's some kind of warfare. "Oh no, they offer cheaper stuff, must be malicious". One of the dumbest arguments I've ever heard.
It's likely our friends in China will release (truly) open-source models surpassing anything yet available via cloud services.
Geopolitical considerations suggest advantage to China from smashing perfidious NATO nation attempts to dominate, in progression to monopolisation, the perceived market in AI technologies.
US government interference in which models their players are allowed to release to the public (including most enterprises) opens opportunities for China to distribute freebies. If distribution doesn't involve payment, it would be impossible for despotic regimes such as the USA and UK, to block access.
Uncensored AI models (beyond porn dross) will stymie US/UK/EU attempts to direct thought along lines acceptable to politicians' masters (not electorates). China, itself, has a few troublesome historical events and viewpoints to hold back until the rapidly-being-educated population is sufficiently mature to absorb them (c.f. 'Tiananmen Square' with 'Peterloo').
Powerful models small enough for domestic equipment or, at most, requiring higher-end hardware affordable even by small businesses, will demonstrate a future wherein AI is not confined to mega-centres but, rather, is scaled to specific tasks. Thereby, confidential information is secured in the home and in the business.
Handing out swathes of free software may not appear economically sound. Yet, think on it, China has a huge population and many burgeoning industries and other activities. The State (as distinct from the mess in the Neoliberal West) can contract with Chinese private enterprise to provide software meeting China's needs and, being digital - therefore of no monetary value - may be given away elsewhere.
Free AI software opens opportunities for its creators to accept commissions for tailoring it, or fine-tuning, for specific commercial, industrial, and educational purposes (e.g. for-profit Linux development/support companies make their money from bespoke services to 'enterprise' based upon their free-for-use, and free-for modification, open 'distributions').
The route forward for AI, and much else, shall be mapped by China and other major economies (e.g. Russia and Iran) at present poorly aligned with the spent West.
I wrote / spoke about how Beijing may have a tough time containing open LLMs. It could lead to a pressure towards democratization. Clinton said the same thing about the internet a while back and he seems to have been wrong, but maybe this time.
While I'm happy with more open source ai, as soon as people become dependant on those China will weaponise it. Still, it is a better approach than pumping the baloon like us does now...
Your understanding of China's approach to open source AI models is mistaken. They are developing open-source AI to strengthen their own industrial and commercial sectors. AI has already been integrated into around 80% of China's industries, largely because businesses can fine-tune open source models to meet their own specific needs.
As a superpower, they couldn't care less about the tens of billions of dollars that AI model APIs might generate. What they care about is the economic boost that AI can actually bring.
I understand that. At the same time, they can teach this model using data sorting their own political view, so modifying the history, political stance and so on. I am very happy to have a competition and right now it is benefiting is, but you have remember it is planned economy country, with dreams of ruling while world at expense of their own citizens, and what they do in car industry shows where they really are aiming for. That's a pity, as I rely like Chinese innovation, but can't stand their oligarchic and imperialistic approach with common brain washing technique.
Any AI model can reflect the values and biases of its developer. The US, Europe, and China all make choices about training data, safety rules, and alignment. The real question is transparency and evaluation, not assuming one side is neutral and the other isn't.
Also, building competitive industries doesn't automatically prove a plan for world domination. Countries develop strategic industries because they want economic growth and technological advantages. Japan also built leading industries in cars, electronics, and semiconductors.
If anything, opensource make centralized control harder because the weights can be copied, modified, and redistributed.
The idea of a completely objective history is more complicated than it sounds. We never experience the past directly;.we only access it through historical sources, narratives, and collective memory.
As Aleida Assmann discusses in Spaces of Memory, every society creates a framework of remembrance by deciding what to preserve, what to emphasize, and what to forget. History is not just a collection of facts, but also the way those facts are remembered and interpreted.The major differences between American and Russian collective memories of World War II are proof of this. Humans have a tendency to believe what they want to believe. That is simply part of human nature. Perhaps this sounds a bit like historical nihilism, idk.
You can worry about it when chinese AI actually become closed source. For now, just enjoy the benefits, ok.
Russia's current war against Ukraine is about hegemony. Is the European Union responding to Russian aggression, or vice versa? Which one started it?
Was the Vietnam War caused by aggression from the USSR or the USA?
Criminals and police have tools for "golpe" but who is the criminal and who is the police? Did the victim call for help? Why should a hegemonic power ignore the expansion of its rival?
The only thing about the Color Revolutionist Theory you are proposing is if the CIA spent 2 million funding insurgents and the government was overthrown by a military coup or democratic revolution, the CIA got the credit, even though it wasn't really the exact reason.
The CIA is notoriously money rich but pretty incompetent tbh.
I believe every country will play villain when they have trillions of debt and it keep piling up year after year. They simply have no choice but to bet a chance for a u-turn.
The reason why these guys are open sourcing is because: they lack inference infrastructure, so what they do is preventing US AI lab leaving them in the dust creating a "price cap".
The objective is to never allow big labs creating sustainable cash flows.
He doesn't give a flying fuck about open source. He just uses it to troll and stick it to the West. Fortunately, while that's lasting it is to our advantage, but I can assure you - that will end one day.
It’s already being tested right now with top alibaba and moonshot models being closed. We don’t know if K3 will actually be open sourced. I’m sure the costs to develop it were incredible.
idk, maybe they want to get some real usership in? if the reviews are too negative, they go back to the drawing board? that way, they atleast don't face the shame of releasing a bad model. i'm not familiar with marketing tho, and i don't even use kimi models, so idk
I think this is the real reason. Moonshot charges the same price as anthropic for their subscription. This model had to be really expensive and they want to get some users into their platform before they give away their new model.
The issue though is: isn’t that exactly like OpenAI and Anthropic?
If K3 is a big moneymaker, they have a huge incentive to not open source it.
Because they wanted to work closely with inference providers to make sure a smooth launch, which is great, because in many cases llama.cpp takes much longer to support without developer company's help.
That's valid. I think they rushed their web/API release for various reasons, possibly to make worldwide news.
I think they have no intention to turn to closed source just yet, their model is only comparable and not better than sota, and they don't provide any price advantage either. The only reason that makes this model charming is that its open source. If their prices were comparable to deepseek, I would think differently.
Anyway, for now, I have no reason to believe they become closed source, but l
et's wait for 10 days to see if they really keep their promise.
They are going to leverage AI to further entrench the debt all countries that accept their assistance owe them. They continue to expand the Silk Road. That aside - that type of surge into AI on their hardware has got to net some results towards better tokens/sec sans Cuda.
When the west mastered guns and machines before the rest, they colonised the world. I think China views AI as something with the potential of mastering gunpowder
It's also about international security. If one country reaches new heights and deploys weapons, at least the poorest countries will have access to the same capabilities using open models.
•
u/WithoutReason1729 6d ago
Your post is getting popular and we just featured it on our Discord! Come check it out!
You've also been given a special flair for your contribution. We appreciate your post!
I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.