6mo ago

Open-source Deepseek R1 dethrones commercial AI, now allegedly being hit by cyberattack

www.cnbc.com

DeepSeek hit with large-scale cyberattack, says it's limiting registrations

World News @lemmy.world

JOMusic @lemmy.ml

6mo ago

Open-source Deepseek R1 dethrones commercial AI, now allegedly being hit by cyberattack

www.cnbc.com /2025/01/27/deepseek-hit-with-large-scale-cyberattack-says-its-limiting-registrations.html

Economy @lemmy.world

News Reporter @lemmy.wtf

BOT

6mo ago

DeepSeek hit with large-scale cyberattack, says it's limiting registrations

www.cnbc.com /2025/01/27/deepseek-hit-with-large-scale-cyberattack-says-its-limiting-registrations.html

10 comments

Stocks take a hit with new foreign competition and they are immediately attacked. Coincidence I'm sure lol
"We will deport you too if you sign up to deepseek!"
-Trump admin probably
"Open source" and "commercial" aren't opposites, plenty of models we consider commercial are also 'open source' - an obvious example being Facebook/Meta's models...
Looking outside of AI there's plenty more examples. Chromium is open source, does that mean it and Google's Blink web rendering engine is non-commercial? I'd say no.
Should also be noted that there's been some pushback recently on whether models trained on closed sources should be called "open source", just because the model itself is.
- Fair, but even if it is commercial, the project being open-source is a huge step in the right direction. Specifically for DeepSeek, it has a number of censored topics like "Tiananmen Square" that it refuses to speak to, but because it's open source, unaffiliated third parties have been able to start spins of it that reintegrate said sensitive topics.
  Perfect? Definitely no, but I'd say it's almost 50% of the way there compared to the awful nature of ChatGPT/Google's models. And it also made people realize that this is possible, so there'll be more people taking it in a good direction that otherwise might not've tried.
- The Open Source Initiative have defined what they believe constitutes "open source AI" (https://opensource.org/ai/open-source-ai-definition). This includes detailed descriptions of training data, explanation on how it was obtained, selected, labeled, processed and filtered. As long as a company utilize any model trained on non-specified data I will assume it is either stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained from non-consenting users.
  I will be clear that I have not read up on Deepseek yet, but I have a hard time believing their training data is specified according to OSI, since no big model yet has done so. Releasing the model source code means little for AI compared to all its training data.
  
  No AI org of any significant size will ever disclose its full training set, and it's foolish to expect such a standard to be met. There is just too much liability. No matter how clean your data collection procedure is, there's no way to guarantee the data set with billions of samples won't contain at least one thing a lawyer could zero in on and drag you into a lawsuit over.
  What Deepseek did, which was full disclosure of methods in a scientific paper, release of weights under MIT license, and release of some auxiliary code, is as much as one can expect.
  
  Indeed. This is what I was thinking of, except I couldn't remember whether it was OSI or FSF pushing for it and, well, I'm too lazy to check lol
  Thanks
- Metas models specifically forbid commercial use
  
  They use it commercially. It's for commercial use, just not outside of Meta because they want to be anticompetitive.
Lot of news about these guys in the last 24 hours.

10 comments