513
The U.S. just pledged hundreds of billions to protect its AI leadership. A Chinese startup with a ‘joke of a budget‘ may have already undercut those hopes (fortune.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
98 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Paywall removed: https://archive.is/MqHc4

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 15 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Its good for the consumer. If companies like deepseek weren't just tossing them out there for anyone to use, Microsoft and Google would currently have a monopoly and it would all be subscription type services.

It also greatly reduces whatever chance the copyright shills have of legislating against it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    It's not good consumers at all, at least no explicitly. There are already open and free LLM models out there anyone can use that are just as good as OpenAI, for example.

    What this is: a pretty simple deathblow to completely collapse the bullshit AI bubble in the US that was created by a bunch of wealthy idiots trying to fleece people out of money. Plain and simple.

    While I'm happy that this pretty much destroys the business of OpenAI and the others, this bullshit funding by executive order is a bailout for those people, right out in the open. It's a classic Trump scam. Nobody will ever see where the money is going, and it's taxpayer dollars going right back into the banks of millionaires billionaires who were about lose the their asses for investing in this stupid shit in the first place.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago

    I don't really follow. Open source is still a net benefit regardless of the goverments investment in closed source, especially for the consumer.

    I agree it's highly likely there's a scam going on but healthy competition will probably force them to actually use some of the fund. If they had a monopoly, it would be easier to give us a minimal viable product and call it a sound investment. They can't be too blatant about it after all.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent