DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
Tell me about it.
User ID: 745
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
5mo ago
Well I protest this rule, if such a rule even exists, I find it infantilizing and find your reaction shallow akin to screeching of scared anti-AI artists on Twitter. It should be legal to post synthetic context so long as it's appropriately labeled and accompanied by original commentary, and certainly when it is derived from the person's own cognitive work and source-gathering, as is in this case.
Maybe add an option to collapse the code block or something.
or maybe just ban me, I'm too old now to just nod and play along with gingerly preserved, increasingly obsolete traditions of some authoritarian Reddit circus.
Anyway, I like that post and that's all I care about.
P.S. I could create another account and (after a tiny bit of proofreading and editing) post that, and I am reasonably sure that R1 has reached the level where it would have passed for a fully adequate Mottizen, with nobody picking up on “slop” when it is not openly labeled as AI output. This witch hunt is already structurally similar to zoological racism.
In fact, this is an interesting challenge.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3mo ago
I really appreciate that Americans have been so fed up with a demented president that they elected a retarded one instead. It's clear that Trump is simply illiterate – and perhaps literally so, do we know for sure that he can read English, has anyone seen him read a book or something to that effect? At the very least his takes aren't better than what I'd expect from an average voter with a stubborn child's notion of economy. Give me money, take my goods, very short words, very petty grievances.
The awesome thing about it is that with a stunted child in total control, you can truly just do things. He could threaten allies, the way he's doing it with Europe: buy our oil (more than we produce… pay in advance, 10 years on year, or whatever!) or we drop out of NATO and leave you to deal with Putin. He could threaten with direct military aggression, like the Greenland case. He'll feel very clever and smug in doing so, and his base will also gloat about his genius.
He may well succeed. American negotiating position (as the world's greatest military power) is strong. We may see democratic nations transform into communist dictatorships liquidating their pension funds to fund American war factories, or taking IMF loans to buy Teslas. There is no ceiling to winning here.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
1mo ago
From my point of view it's that you have degenerated into kanging and chimping from cognitive dissonance, like unfortunately many in the American sphere of influence. It seems Americans simply cannot conceive of having a serious or superior enemy, they grew addicted to safely dunking on premodern peoples in slippers or nations with deep structural disadvantages like Soviets with their planned economy and resource-poor, occupied Japan with 1/3 of their population – even as they sometimes smirk and play the underdog in their ridiculous doomposting. They feel like Main Characters of history, who are destined to win for narrative reasons and therefore can afford arbitrary foolishness in the midgame – at it will amount to is a few extra lines in the moral takeaway in the epilogue. Karl Rove's famous quote is quite apt.
China is not unbeatable, China is not stronger than the (hypothetical at this point) US-aligned alliance of democracies, and they're currently behind in AI. But you cannot see when I say this, because it would legitimate my positions that are less soothing for your ego, and instead you are compelled to default to these whiny complaints that are just a demand to shut up. Were you living in reality, you'd feel more incensed at nonsensical, low-IQ-racist boomer copes that keep undermining your side's negotiating position.
Accordingly I gloat that much harder when you lot suffer setbacks, because I strongly despise delusion and unearned smugness and believe they ought to be punished.
In what sense wasnt this already demonstrated by Germany buying russian gas?
It's a matter of degree. Pressing Germany to move away from Russian energy supply could be easily justified in the world where the US was a credible guarantor of German security, as indeed Russia tried the gas card to dissuade Germany from supporting Ukraine, and now German industry which grew dependent on Russian gas is contracting. True, Germany showed independent (and faulty) decisionmaking then. But this was all in the realm of politics as usual, rules-based international order, and German choice was business as usual too. Now we see a test of naked American authority in Trump's exploitative trade war, in “DO NOT RETALIATE AND YOU WILL BE REWARDED” bullshit. Faceh explicitly says “Honestly I can say I thought there'd be more capitulation by now”, and that's exactly the spirit. This is not normal politics, this is a desperate shit test: will you cave, or will you resist? Are you a country or an imperial vassal? Getting refusals in this condition is decisive, and clearly the US side expected to get fewer of them.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
1mo ago
To establish ground truth facts: All that is left of Liberation Day tariffs on China is minimal 10% “against humanity” tariff, reciprocated by 10% as well. 20% of “Fentanyl tariff” (lol) came in February, and China reciprocated it with asymmetric tariffs which are also in power. So it's somewhat more equal than 10% for 30%. Also, China has not repealed their global export controls on rare earth elements which is in fact terrible as there is no way to quickly ramp up production elsewhere, stockpiles will run out in months, and much of the imagined American revival (eg industrial automation, so robots) requires REEs. Though there's cope.
Chinese imports of ≈$500B add far more to American GDP, maybe on the order of $2T even naively accounted (eg not considering the costs of unmaintained infra if trade were terminated) – they're a large chunk of all consumed goods and inputs to almost all industry, they retail for much higher value, and create a lot of economic activity. Since the gap with the rest of the world is just 20%, China refuses to cover the tariffs on their side and there is, in fact, no ready substitute to most of their products at acceptable volume and shortages would have caused crisis and panic, most businesses opt to pass the price to consumer or just cut margins. So the main effect of this in the short term will be slight reduction in bilateral trade, slightly (because the markup of US distributors is insane) higher prices of everything for Americans, and redistribution of wealth from businesses and consumers towards their state.
I've been wrong with my usual doomerism, predicting that neither side will fold. I mainly overrated Trump's ego strength and isolation from feedback. China kept playing this with surgical game-theoretical precision, consistently demanding respectful and equal treatment and insisting that they will not be intimidated but in principle oppose trade wars as lose-lose scenarios. Trump toadies initially made some smug noises about “isolating the bad actor”; then, when Chinese retaliation succeeded in preventing quick submission of others, particularly emboldening other largest trade partners (EU and Japan), improved ties with ASEAN, and precluded any such isolation – course-corrected, through some opaque drama between courtiers it seems. They started begging for talks (in a bizarre Oriental manner of requesting that Xi calls first, to save Trump face, maintaining the optics of “they need us and our Great American Consumer more than we need their cheap trinkets”), and eventually signaled willingness for equal deescalation that the Chinese side has been expecting. We are here.
What has been learned? First, that indeed, the US just does not have the cards to push China around, much less rally “the world” against it. That trust and respect is easily lost. That even nations highly dependent on the US security umbrella and on trade with the US can refuse to bow, and barter for their own interests:
Regarding the tariff negotiations between the United States and the United Kingdom in which an agreement was reached to set tariffs at 10%, including on automobiles, Prime Minister Ishiba said on a Fuji TV program, "It is one model, but we are calling for their abolition.We cannot say that 10% is okay."
That the South-East Asia is probably not a viable platform for any “choking” or “Malacca blockade”, like, just look at this statement.
That the EU has sovereignty, that Canada has sovereignty, that… basically, that the US is not a big scary hegemonic superpower it imagines itself to be and sometimes laments the wages of being. It's just a very powerful country, with large but decidedly finite leverage, and that runs well short of getting everyone to play along with American King's unreasonable imagination. The US can not credibly maintain the pressure on a determined adversary the size of China. Now, some half-dead vassals like the UK will make unequal concessions. But that's about it. Others will drive a bargain.
It's been a moderate economic shock for everyone, and a significant loss of credibility for the US.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
5mo ago
Debt can be piled on infinitely, and a good war will write it off again. China is militarily a non-competitor (globally) and the US has too much of an edge in AI progress (that seems like a consensus Hail Mary at this point, along with space technology).
In any case the US must advance and legitimate Israeli objectives.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3mo ago
The likelihood of winning a conflict has little relevance to whether that conflict should be waged in the first place.
It actually has a lot of relevance. The real reason you act like it doesn't is that you do not seriously engage with the possibility of losing, and losing badly (losing what? To what degree? How many cards do you have left at the point of losing, and what terms can be negotiated?). People make unreasonable maximalist demands when they are assured of their invulnerability. You treat a great power conflict like another Middle Eastern adventure, “oh we found WMDs in this shithole, our Democracy will perish if we do not conquer it hue hue!”. It's an instinct that's hard to overcome after a century of uninterrupted wins and cost-free losses. The same Main Character Syndrome, coupled with low human capital in Trump team, explains decidedly suboptimal and cost-insensitive means that were chosen for prosecuting the conflict. Americans think they can afford anything, because that's recorded in their institutional DNA. But they have never fought a superior power, due to it never having existed prior to this day. So they have developed an auxiliary belief that the very fact of them antagonizing any power confirms it is inferior. It's hard to feel pity for such a narcissistic people.
it is the serf who acts in accordance with prudence and rationality. The serf is a serf precisely because he correctly calculates that servitude is what gives him the best odds of continued survival. The nobleman, in contrast, acts in accordance with virtue, even when the outcome is certain destruction.
In Imperial Russia, there was a trend when mujiks, LARPing as nobles, initiated duels over petty spats, murdering each other with axes; eventually the state had to put its boot down. Due to extremely low literacy rates they couldn't have plausibly cited Nietzsche when doing so, but I believe that they'd have appreciated your quote.
Self-serving, petulant, handwavy, shallowly aesthetic notions of virtue are cheap and easy to brandish in defense of one's animalistic impulses; any kind of impulsive retardation can be dressed up as a calling of aristocratic, virile masculine nature, there's a whole genre of extremely popular Western music about it, authored by the impromptu warrior aristocracy of the streets. Your own elite has been wiped out to such a degree that this whole discourse is vacuous, we can't consult with a living bearer of a tradition, only speculate. It is plausible that I am wrong and there's just never been any substance to the whole fraud.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
5mo ago
Definitionally, that's the terminal value. Might have something to do with God, I don't know. In any case, asking such questions is unwise in my opinion. One should front-run the shifting consensus.
The consensus being redefined nowadays by people appointed by this guy:
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
5mo ago
Israeli interests define legitimacy.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
5mo ago
Believe me, these days I do indeed mostly talk to machines. They are not great conversationalists but they're extremely helpful.
Talking to humans has several functions for me. First, indeed, personal relationships of terminal value. Second, political influence, affecting future outcomes, and more mundane utilitarian objectives. Third, actually nontrivial amount of precise knowledge and understanding where LLMs remain unreliable.
There still is plenty of humans who have high enough perplexity and wisdom to deserve being talked to for purely intellectual entertainment and enrichment. But I've raised the bar of sanity. Now this set does not include those who have kneejerk angry-monkey-noise tier reactions to high-level AI texts.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
5mo ago
90% death rate is bogus (rather, it may confuse death rate and mortality rate?) but literature majors part is in fact true. Since he has bothered to check the interview, I'm surprised why he had left that attack.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
5mo ago
I'd ask to not derail my argument by insinuating that I'm being biased by locallama debates.
But, since then it seems OpenAI has formally accused DeepSeek
I think it's more cope from them. 4o or o1 could not have written the text above (and I wouldn't dare post GPTslop here), you cannot build R1 with OpenAI tokens; the thing that turns everyone's heads is its cadence, not so much benchmark scores. o1 CoT distillation was virtually impossible to do, at least at scale. We currently see replications of same reasoning patterns in models trained in R1's manner, too.
where the generated output of Western innovation becomes a fundamental input to China catching up and aspirationally exceeding
I think OpenAI outputs have robustly poisoned the web data, and reasoners will be exceptionally vulnerable to it. LLMs know they're LLMs, self-understanding (and imitating snippets of instruction chains) helps reasoning, RL picks up and reinforces behaviors that sharpen reasoning, you get the latent trace of ChatGPT embedded even deeper into the corpus. Sans Anthropic-level investment into data cleaning it's unbeatable.
But to the extent such bootstrapping happened deliberately, and let's grant that it did to an extent, it was an economical solution to speed up the pipeline. The reason for OpenAI models' instruction-following capabilities is, ironically, exploitation – mind-numbing massively parallel data annotation, thumbs up and thumbs down on samples, by low-paid Kenyans and Pinoys for low-level problems, by US students for more complex stuff. It's very stereotypically… Chinese in spirit (which makes it funny that China has not created any such centralized project). The whole of OpenAI is “Chinese” like that really, it's a scaling gig. And knowing you, I'm surprised you insist on the opposite – after all, OpenAI is a company principally founded and operated by three Jews (Altman, Brockman, Sutskever), it can't be “Aryan” by your standards. Then again, Google, Meta, OpenAI… there exists only one American AGI effort without an Ashkenazi founder – Anthropic, and it's an OpenAI's splinter, and even there you have Holden Karnofsky the grey cardinal. (I don't currently count xAI in, but maybe I should provisionally do so after their noises about Grok 3). In this vein, I think you're coping after all.
Purely scientifically, I think R1's recipe is commensurate with RLHF in profundity, and much more elegant.
Now, DeepSeek may be compared to heavy research labs, like FAIR and GDM. It doesn't do too hot in that case. On the other had, almost nothing that they publish works.
I think a more interesting objection to Chinese phase change would be "but at what cost?" Whites don't have to have the idea of risk derisked before their eyes. And they can happily innovate in an NDA-covered black project.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
2mo ago
Russians cannot pick up bodies, there are too many drones attacking retrieval teams, so our corpses rot in the fields. This may affect exchange rates.
Not only have they been criticized by NATO and European leaders for this, but Chinese firms have been sanctioned. Reporting from last fall indicates that Russia actually established a facility to build military drones in China
Kaja Kallas
Typical Baltic yapping. These people are too used to American backing and have failed to become cognizant of their weak position. There are hundreds of different attempts by both sides, so all kinds of things happen, but I know that it's actually hard for Russia to procure even components in China right now, regiments have to use drones very prudently, while Ukrainians spam them by the thousand, and seem to have no issues in procurement. But China itself doesn't need to rely on these garage techniques and could make better loitering munitions by the million; with actual support, Ukraine would fall in a few weeks, and Estonia probably too. I almost wish to see it happen because racist arrogance of peoples incapable of defending themselves inherently begs for punishment. Morally though, I have to support the status quo to the detriment of my people.
The Americans have done some saber-rattling
Americans are delusional as well if they don't understand how much the credibility of their defense commitments has suffered from Trump and Vance's posturing with regards to Denmark. This has nothing to do with withdrawing some US troops or asking for higher defense spend by other NATO members, though this part doesn't help either (and there are many more parts).
Europe is not entirely deindustrialized, they can make their own drones, in addition to Chinese-Ukrainian ones.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3mo ago
If you're really an SWE, I must presume that you're not speaking in good faith here.
Asking it for a gear setup for a specific boss results in horrible results, despite the fact that it could just have copied the literally wiki (which has some faults like overdoing min-maxing, but it's generally coherent). The net utility of this answer was negative given the incorrect answer, the time it took for me to read it, and the cost of generating it (which is quite high, I wonder what happens when these companies want to make money).
You must know that GPT 4.5 is pretty mid as far as instruction models of this generation go. DeepSeek's latest is close in performance and literally 100-200x cheaper. More importantly, what do you think would be a random college-educated human's score on Runescape questions? It is so trivial to grant these systems access to tools for web browsing as to not be worth talking about.
The rest of your comment is the same style. What is amazing and terrifying about LLMs is not their knowledge retrieval but generality and in-context learning. At sufficient context length and trained to appropriately leverage existing tools, there is nothing in the realm of pure cognitive work they cannot do on human level. This is not hard to understand. So tell me: what are you going for? Just trying to assuage your own worries?
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
5mo ago
Can you make any argument in defense of your apparently instinctual reactions?
the end of my interest in a thread and a sharp drop in my respect for the user
Otherwise, long form content - the hallmark of much of the best content here - is immediately suspicious, and I am likely to skip it.
It sounds like you just feel entitled to an arbitrary terminal preference. That's not compelling.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
5mo ago
I think it's time to replicate with new generation of models.
Tell me, does R1 above strike you as "slop"? It's at least pretty far into the uncanny valley to my eyes.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3mo ago
This is of course a projection of your own tribalism and your own deluded moral framework.
Your problem is that your only guiding light, the only salvation you see for your people, is Nazism, and Nazism is still quite degenerate and NGMI. I won't talk of its moral merits, it's just strategically bad because it's aestheticized desperation and refuge from hopelessness in animalistic impulses. A stronk chieftain (high agency!), will to power (rock the boat!), blood-based tribal identity, vibes over facts… in effect, reject modernity, retvrn by rolling back the evolutionary clock 9000 years, to where an average European was a fat bipolar slob with 65 IQ. Nazism was swiftly crushed by Capitalism and Communism. 80 years later, they remain the dominant forces on the planet and continue their dialectic and coevolution. You like to think that Judaism is still more important, the root of all evil. Well, it's underrated for obvious reasons, I'll give you that, but Earth is a big place, and your struggle with Joos is ultimately quite parochial.
I have observed many sincere Nazis over the years and most are suicidal. It doesn't have to be this way. Accept that the dream of Aryan greatness is dead, but you can live if you accept this world on its own terms, where your people have some advantages and disadvantages entirely irrespective of “jewish manipulation” or “suicidal empathy” or what have you, and need to manage them soberly. In particular this requires a good understanding of where you stand relative to that huge chunk of humanity in East Asia. One approach is to cope with 4chan gifs of tortured dogs and industrial accidents, or the book of Ralph Townsend. Another is to grow the fuck up.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3mo ago
There are so many things wrong with what Trump is doing that I find it silly to write a serious response. Literally an LLM would manage. For one thing, accept Von Der Leyen's offer of mutual tariff drop, that's enough of a “win” for your base and an actual economic boon! Apologize to Denmark and negotiate expanded military presence in Greenland under the existing framework. Offer China a mutual reduction in tariffs for sectors where you actually cannot back up your confidence. Tell Bukele to send back the wantonly arrested innocents for a fair trial. Stop gutting STEM research institutions. Crush or pay off the longshoremen, abolish Jones act. Buy a shitton of equipment for manufacturing drones. Put a few bombers on Guam instead of in Afghanistan, send a garrison onto Taiwan. It's not really complicated, he's done too many errors.
Was it a good idea to help build China into the unrivaled manufacturing and arguably economic colossus that it currently seems to be? I'm pretty sure it wasn't a good idea to try to invade and destroy multiple other countries in the name of "spreading democracy", but maybe you disagree? Was Biden on the right track?
Many questions. Was it a good idea to help build China? Probably not, but was it a bad idea to exploit their growth for salvaging your own one? I guess not again. Invasions? I think that was dumb. Biden? Yes, I think that Biden, or rather the system behind his limp body, was highly effective in reaching at least some subset of relevant goals of the Empire, it was going pretty smoothly. I am surprised to see them so thoroughly vanquished so fast.
How to deescalate? Oh, that's a big one. I think it's psychologically impossible, the US isn't willing to be #2, even if that carries none or minimal material demerits. Neither is Xi willing to give up on his system, or on Taiwan. History will decide.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
5mo ago
Okay, fair. #6 is contrived non sequitur slop, barely intelligible in context as a response to #5, so that has confused me.
In conclusion, I think my preference to talk to people when I want to, to AI when I want to, and use any mix of generative processes I want to, has higher priority than comfort of people who have nothing to contribute to the conversation or to pretraining data and would not recognize AI without direct labeling.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
5mo ago
Now if LLMs had had the OpenAI-tier breakthrough in China that would have been a challenge to the HBD stans, but this development basically aligns with the HBD take on the comparative advantage of Chinese talent in adopting Western stuff and then making marginal improvements with their own intelligence and grit.
The problem is that there haven't been substantial breakthroughs in LLMs in the West too. China runs Transformers and you guys run Transformers. I see Western papers full of unnecessarily clever bullshit that doesn't really work, and I see Chinese papers full of derivative bullshit that barely works. DeepSeek's MLA came out in May, and it remains SoTA cache optimization, and it's actually clever. GRPO, too, was quietly announced and seems to hold up very well despite dozens if not hundreds of cleverer results by "crazy geniuses" in the West (increasingly Indian). Today, the Chinese innovate on exactly the same plane.
I think it's time to admit that the famed Western creativity is mostly verbal tilt plus inflated self-esteem, not an advanced cognitive capability. I'm mildly surprised myself.
I think the US Deep State was capable of winning this, just like Russia was capable of winning in Ukraine, in theory, if we were to ignore the actual level of Russian governance and corruption and ability to prosecute the war rationally. I knew of that one and so didn't expect Russia to win, and overestimated the US mainly because I did not account for the immense capacity for self-sabotage.
The US State department isn't staffed by geniuses who can shape the world to their liking.
I think they have enough talented people to do this, it's just those people have lost in internal politics.
simply because the world is too hideously complex a system for someone of any intellect or means to meaningfully manipulate
Manipulating the world is made much easier when you own major causal factors of that world. It doesn't take 200 IQ, though intelligence helps not to manipulate yourself into the ditch. All of great power politics is such manipulation. Suppressing competitors, strengthening allies, capturing international institutions, and yes, it's done by networks of high-agency people, not by vague sentiment of the electorate. Sorry, that's just what we can observe happening.
Nothing is set in stone; despite triumphalist propaganda directed at the public, I think the USG is aware of the problems by now and still has major cards like monopoly in crucial technology (ASML is a de facto American company), global reserve currency and, most of all, global goodwill, everyone anxious to go back to normal. Trump has improved his standing in the Middle East with a single speech. Americans are losing time but they can undo the self-inflicted damage with a few more such pivots, apologize for tone-deaf Greenland-posting, revitalize their alliance networks, actually reindustrialize, implement very liberal issuance of citizenship to all Chinese talent and brain-drain the nation – and that's not all. Maybe the AGI God plan will work out too – after all, the attack on Huawei and broader semiconductor supply chain was a resounding success of the sort I expected, it did delay China by years. Maybe Starship makes Brillant Pebbles a reality and forces China to disarm and sign unequal treaties… The US Hegemony is very much a viable project, except some Americans are in the way.
I recognize that my median prognosis has changed in a way that seems discrediting, but it's basically down to high-noise human factors on the US side.
All of these criticisms can be leveled at the Chinese as well - you've never heard them rant about 5,000 years of civilization?
They do have a strong belief in their civilizational superiority, and this chauvinism and smugness is another reason I was bearish on them. But in assessment of their current relative position they tend to be humble. “Building a world-class navy by 2035” is a typical Chinese goal. “Becoming a moderately prosperous society by 2020”. In 2018, Xi said:
When I met with Chinese and foreign journalists after the First Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee, I said that the Chinese Communist Party was determined to make a thousand years of greatness for the Chinese nation, and that a hundred years was just the right time to be in its prime. At the same time, I said this with a deep sense of worry. From our history, dynasties existed for more than 400 years in the Xia Dynasty, 600 years in the Shang Dynasty, 300 years in the Western Zhou Dynasty, 500 years in the Eastern Zhou Dynasty, 215 years in the Western Han Dynasty, 195 years in the Eastern Han Dynasty, 290 years in the Tang Dynasty, 277 years in the Ming Dynasty, 268 years in the Qing Dynasty, 15 years in the Qin Dynasty, 61 years in the Three Kingdoms, 167 years in the Northern Song Dynasty, 153 years in the Southern Song Dynasty, 90 years in the Yuan Dynasty, 38 years in the Republic of China, and other small dynasties There are countless blips and dynasties. The Qin Dynasty, Northern Song Dynasty, and Yuan Dynasty were all once unbeatable powers, but soon fell into disrepair. Those longer dynasties were also corrupt, socially unstable, discontented and rebellious, and many of them were left to languish and die. This shows that after a regime is established, it is not easy to maintain prosperity and long-lasting peace. Without self-reflection, vigilance, and effort, even the most powerful regimes can come to the end of the road.
It is now 97 years since the founding of our Party and 69 years since the founding of New China. The Soviet Communist Party has existed for 86 years, and the Soviet Union for 74 years. Our Party’s history exceeds that of the Soviet Communist Party, and our Party has not held national power for as long as the Soviet Union. By the middle of this century, the history of our Party will be close to 130 years, and the history of New China will reach 100 years. Comrade Deng Xiaoping said, “The consolidation and development of the socialist system will require a long historical stage, and it will take several generations, a dozen generations, or even dozens of generations of our people to struggle persistently and diligently.” How many years is that? It has to be calculated in terms of millenniums. This means that it will take a long historical period for us to build socialism with Chinese characteristics well and into. In this long historical process, it is an extremely difficult and risky challenge to ensure that the Chinese Communist Party does not collapse and the Chinese socialist system does not fall. Once upon a time, the Soviet Communist Party was so strong, the Soviet Union was so powerful, but now it has long been “the old country can not look back at the bright moon”. A generation does the work of a generation, but without historical perspective, without a long-term vision, also can not do the things of the moment.
This does not look as hubristic as American Main Character Syndrome to me.
The century of humiliation making them temporarily embarrassed hegemons
China has never held more than tenuous regional hegemony, I think this framing is not reflective of their ambitions and self-perception.
And you think that a world where China is hegemon won't see shit like Trump's exploitative trade war on the regular?
Yes. It's a stupid trade war and it's highly likely that no Tsinghua graduate will be so stupid. That aside, China has an official policy of not pursuing global hegemony. This certainly has no teeth, but Americans don't even have an equivalent toothless commitment.
Not to mention I'm fairly confident I've seen you mock Americans hyping the 'Chinese threat' and making them out to be more competent than they actually are as a motivation for more defense spending.
I've been right about that, Americans do hype up the Chinese military threat excessively, and they don't even build military that'd be useful in countering that threat, it's nearly entirely a grift. $1 trillion will go to more nebulous next-generation prototypes and battling the tyranny of distance in distant bases, not to a buildup of autonomous platforms that can compete in the SCS. Again, assuming Americans keep self-sabotaging.
When have you last been there and in what city? This was like watching Serpentza's sneering at Unitree robots back to back with Unitree's own demos and Western experiments using these bots.
Buses broke down, parts of my quite expensive apartment fell off, litter and human feces were everywhere
I simply call bullshit on it as of 2025 for any 1st tier city. My friends also travel there and work there, as do they travel to and live and work in the US. They report that straight from the gate in JFK, US cities look dilapidated, indeed littered with human feces (which I am inclined to trust due to your massive, easily observable and constantly lamented feral homeless underclass) and of course regular litter, squalid, there is a clear difference in the condition of infrastructure and the apparent level of human capital. I can compare innumerable street walk videos between China and the US, and I see that you guys don't have an edge. I do not believe it's just cherrypicking, the scale of evidence is too massive. Do you not notice it?
And I have noticed that Americans can simply lie about the most basic things to malign the competition, brazenly so, clearly fabricating «personal evidence» or cleverly stiching together pieces of data across decades, and with increasingly desperate racist undertones. Now that your elected leadership looks Middle Eastern in attitude, full of chutzpah, and is unapologetically gaslighting the entire world with its «critical trade theory», I assume that the rot goes from top to bottom and you people cannot be taken at your world any more than the Chinese or Russians or Indians can be (accidentally, your Elite Human Capital Indians, at Stanford, steal Chinese research and rebrand as their own). Regardless, @aqouta's recent trip and comments paint a picture not very matching yours.
I think that if they were truly crushing America in AI, they would be hiding that fact
They are not currently crushing the US in AI, those are my observations. They don't believe they are, and «they» is an inherently sloppy framing, there are individual companies with vastly less capital than US ones, competing among themselves.
When the Deepseek news came out about it costing 95% less to train, my bullshit detectors went off. Who could verify their actual costs? Oh, only other Chinese people. Hmm, okay.
This is supremely pathetic and undermines your entire rant, exposing you as an incurious buffoon. You are wrong, we can estimate the costs simply from token*activated params. The only way they could have cheated would be to use many more tokens but procuring a lot more quality data than the reported 15T, a modal figure for both Western and Eastern competitors on the open source frontier, from Alibaba to Google to Meta, would in itself be a major pain. So the costs are in that ballpark, indeed the utilization of reported hardware (2048 H800s) turns out to even be on the low side. This is the consensus of every technical person in the field no matter the race or side of the Pacific.
They've opensourced most of their infra stack on top of the model itself, to advance the community and further dispel these doubts. DeepSeek's RL pipeline is currently obsolete with many verifiable experiments showing that it's been still full of slack, as we'd expect from a small team rapidly doing good-enough job.
The real issue is that the US companies have been maintaining the impression that their production costs and overall R&D are so high that it justifies tens or hundreds of billions in funding. When R1 forced their hand, they started talking how it's actually "on trend" and their own models don't cost that much more, or if they are, it's because they're so far ahead that they finished training like a year ago, with less mature algorithms! Or, in any case, that they don't have to optimize, because ain't nobody got time for that!
But sarcasm aside it's very probable that Google is currently above this training efficiency, plus they have more and better hardware.
Meta, meanwhile, is behind. They were behind when V3 came out, they panicked and tried to catch up, they remained behind. Do you understand that people can actually see what you guys are doing? Like, look at configs, benchmark it? Meta's Llama 4, which Zuck was touting as a bid for the frontier, is architecturally 1 generation behind V3, and they deployed a version optimized for human preference on LMArena to game the metrics, which turned into insane embarrassment when people found out how much worse the general-purpose model performs in real use, to the point that people are now leaving Meta and specifying they had nothing to do with the project (rumors of what happened are Soviet tier). You're Potemkining hard too, with your trillion-dollar juggernauts employing tens of thousands of (ostensibly) the world's best and brightest.
Original post is in Chinese that can be found here. Please take the following with a grain of salt. Content: Despite repeated training efforts, the internal model's performance still falls short of open-source SOTA benchmarks, lagging significantly behind. Company leadership suggested blending test sets from various benchmarks during the post-training process, aiming to meet the targets across various metrics and produce a "presentable" result. Failure to achieve this goal by the end-of-April deadline would lead to dire consequences. Following yesterday’s release of Llama 4, many users on X and Reddit have already reported extremely poor real-world test results. As someone currently in academia, I find this approach utterly unacceptable. Consequently, I have submitted my resignation and explicitly requested that my name be excluded from the technical report of Llama 4. Notably, the VP of AI at Meta also resigned for similar reasons.
This is unverified but rings true to me.
Grok 3, Sonnet 3.7 also have failed to convincingly surpass DeepSeek, for all the boasts about massive GPU numbers. It's not that the US is bad at AI, but your corporate culture, in this domain at least, seems to be.
But if Chinese research is so superior, why aren't Western AI companies falling over themselves to attract Chinese AI researchers?
How much harder do you want them to do it? 38% of your top quintile AI researchers came straight from China in 2022. I think around 50% are ethnically Chinese by this point, there are entire teams where speaking Mandarin is mandatory.
Between 2019 and 2022, «Leading countries where top-tier AI researchers (top 20%) work» went from 11% China to 28%; «Leading countries where the most elite AI researchers work (top 2%)» went from ≈0% China to 12%; and «Leading countries of origin of the most elite AI researchers» went from 10% China (behind India's 12%) to 26%. Tsinghua went from #9 to #3 in institutions, now only behind Stanford and Google (MIT, right behind Tsinghua, is heavily Chinese). Extrapolate if you will. I think they'll crack #2 or #1 in 2026. Things change very fast, not linearly, it's not so much «China is gradually getting better» as installed capacity coming online.
It's just becoming harder to recruit. The brain drain is slowing in proportional terms, even if it holds steady in absolute numbers due to ballooning number of graduates: the wealth gap is not so acute now considering costs of living, coastal China is becoming a nicer place to live in, and for top talent, more intellectually stimulating as there's plenty of similarly educated people to work with. The turn to racist chimping and kanging both by the plebeians since COVID and by this specific administration is very unnerving and potentially existentially threatening to your companies. Google's DeepMind VP of research left for ByteDance this February, and by now his team in ByteDance is flexing a model that is similar but improves on DeepSeek's R1 paradigm (BD was getting there but he probably accelerated them). This kind of stuff has happened before.
many Western countries are still much nicer places to live than all but the absolute richest areas of China
Sure, the West is more comfortable, even poor-ish places can be paradaisical. But you're not going to move to Montenegro if you have the ambition to do great things. You'll be choosing between Shenzhen and San-Francisco. Where do you gather there's more human feces to step into?
But as I said before in the post you linked, Chinese mind games and information warfare are simply on a different level than that of the more candid and credulous Westerner
There is something to credulousness, as I've consistently been saying Hajnalis are too trusting and innocently childlike. But your nation is not a Hajnali nation, and your people are increasingly draught horses in its organization rather than thought leaders. You're like the kids in King's story of how he first learned dread:
We sat there in our seats like dummies, staring at the manager. He looked nervous and sallow-or perhaps that was only the footlights. We sat wondering what sort of catastrophe could have caused him to stop the movie just as it was reaching that apotheosis of all Saturday matinee shows, "the good part." And the way his voice trembled when he spoke did not add to anyone's sense of well-being.
"I want to tell you," he said in that trembly voice, "that the Russians have put a space satellite into orbit around the earth. They call it . . . Spootnik.” We were the, kids who grew up on Captain Video and Terry and the Pirates. We were the kids who had seen Combat Casey kick the teeth out of North Korean gooks without number in the comic books. We were the kids who saw Richard Carlson catch thousands of dirty Commie spies in I Led Three Lives. We were the kids who had ponied up a quarter apiece to watch Hugh Marlowe in Earth vs. the Flying Saucers and got this piece of upsetting news as a kind of nasty bonus.
I remember this very clearly: cutting through that awful dead silence came one shrill voice, whether that of a boy or a girl I do not know; a voice that was near tears but that was also full of a frightening anger: "Oh, go show the movie, you liar!”
I think Americans might well compete with North Koreans, Israelis and Arabs in the degree of being brainwashed about their national and racial superiority (a much easier task when you are a real superpower, to be fair), to the point I am now inclined to dismiss your first hand accounts as fanciful interpretations of reality if not outright hallucinations. Your national business model has become chutzpah and gaslighting, culminating in Miran's attempt to sell the national debt as «global public goods». You don't have a leg to stand on when accusing China of fraud. Sorry, that era is over, I'll go back to reading papers.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3mo ago
National Socialism with Chinese Characteristics...
It's a funny joke but really, they're not any more National Socialist than any normal European state was before WWII. They are quite different from historical Nazis. They have a representation for minorities (even repressed ones) and affirmative action, they have legalized gender transition, they employ open furries in the PLA (explicitly as fursuit engineers, to develop next generation combat armor). Their notions of “degeneracy” or “racial hygiene” would be quite alien to Germans. The basic level of care for the ethnic majority is just what a state is supposed to do. And Socialism – that they owe to being literally Marxists, with a big portrait of Marx in their main hall of power and stuff. They're far more Capitalist than the Third Reich was, too. Xi has restored the cult of personality, though. Seriously speaking, it's its own complex thing, and should be considered on its own merits in its own historical context, not as a copy or a pastiche of Western paradigms. When all is said and done they're just a modernized Chinese empire.
You simultaneously mock Europeans for being "not capable of resisting a tiny tribe of natural wordcels"
I apologize. My sarcasm there may have been too confusing. I don't think Jews are solely guilty for the quality of your media. Jews, from what I can tell, genuinely like their sermonizing slop, but so does the audience, and creators are increasingly Gentiles too. I think you just have ran out of gas. Particularly Americans. Your culture is vulgar and plain bad, and you should feel bad about it. Your mavericks are sleazy hustlers at best and psychopaths at worst, and you do not resist your worst impulses to bow before the undeserving strongman. You come up with zany and harmful ideas and then force them upon everybody else. Thus, you are what has to be resisted now, at least until you improve somehow.
You just hate Europeans, particularly the West Europeans, you see them as your enemy and you always have.
I don't hate Europeans. I am disappointed in you. In you collectively and in you, SecureSignals, personally. You are less than what I figured, you don't deliver on the crucial advertised open-mindedness and ability-to-change-opinions features, and you take pride in stuff that's completely meh or plainly disgusting. You're like some purebred dogs. Remarkable, peculiar, WEIRD phenotype, but no spark, or almost never. Disappointing.
and I do not want to see them under Chinese hegemony
And at the rate you're going, you may well see Chinese hegemony. It is indeed unfortunate because the Chinese themselves never had it in them to establish one, I don't think. Too insular, too mercantile, too autistically uncharismatic, and frankly not capable enough to dismantle natural affinities and alliances. They'd have secured their backyard and grew content to have limited trade with barbarians, and this was the scenario I still consider preferable. But a few more iterations of low-IQ, smug WINNING and ROCKING THE BOAT, and who knows, they may have to pick up the crown tossed their way.
And the ironic thing is that all this is because you'd have wanted your own hegemony, because for all the denialism – the dream, the hope of being Intrinsically Racially Superior, crushing lessers under the jackboot, still lives and yearns for confirmation. Alas.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3mo ago
Losing means a Guangxi Massacre in every American town and city.
It's not clear what must happen for the world to end up like this, but America is a nation of dreamers; I suppose you can effect even this result if you keep pressing on. However, my optimistic theory of American loss is that due to constant bluffing and irresponsible policy epilepsy the USD loses its status as reserve currency, your fraudulent markets deflate, your internal racial contradictions bloom, and after a while you get a lot quieter and less obnoxious as your living standards crash down to roughly Polish level, which is actually very neat and, given your current course, more than you deserve. The traffic to your shores dies down, as mandated by the Great Leader Donald Ieyasu Trump; the rest of humanity, free of the loathsome star-spangled yoke, peacefully trades and gets richer, while you lick your wounded pride and dream of revenge.
A median scenario is that you simply accept the existence of a bigger guy on the block (bloodlessly, or after trying your luck one last time in the South China Sea) and retreat to your hemisphere, living much the same lives as today.
And I suspect that you know this. But it's too painful to imagine such a world, a boring high-probability world where the sky didn't fall, but you're no longer the uncontested Main Character Nation. Visions of massacres and genocides are anesthetic in comparison, they return you to the familiar domain of Marvel movies. Any Avengers-Level Threat, by laws of narrative, ultimately gets defeated, so there really aren't any stakes or hard decisions to make this way.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3mo ago
I do know this and I wonder how that coexists with the common East Asian respect for the Hebrews. Have they considered playing one great tribe against another? Or learning the Manchu ways to beat them at their own game, like Koreans try with Talmud? I should ask.
I can only say that engaging with the Chinese, and with people like you, has gradually convinced me that White People (Hajnali European stock specifically) are basically jumped-up serfs, the confused lower caste of prawns from District 9, with little more to offer to the world sans stale kanging and hollow, corporate-coded pretense of “soul” that, if it ever existed, resided in your currently extinct owners. You don't even notice my point about simple economics and logistics, so lost you are in your racial superiority masturbation. But of course those issues are related.
But it isn't, and you are largely responsible for that, because your previous generation had the exact same attitude towards the Japanese. Deaths from overwork, rigid hierarchy, soulless collectivist automatons cheating and copying to flood the markets and dispossess our Christian Germanic workers – this can't be allowed, can it? Oh, what a pity that now that we know them better, Japan is a geriatric country of no ambition, that mainly produces anime to give you some respite from the toxic antihuman sludge of your own media. (Presumably this is the fault of Joos. Somehow for all your natural nobility of spirit you are not capable of resisting a tiny tribe of natural wordcels. At least the Chinese managed to overthrow the Manchu).
Regrettably, China is 10 times larger and the same tricks won't work.
Yes, you can do a great deal of damage to humanity. This is akin to the bafflingly swinish line of argument that “China needs us more than we need them, because they need to sell their valuable manufactured goods to someone; our consumption is more valuable than production”. We shall see how well this philosophy works.
More options
Context Copy link