I run deepseek locally so obviously I appreciate that they made that decision, but let’s not pretend that something can’t be given away for free with bad intentions. People running LLMs locally are a drop in the bucket compared to people just downloading an app.
I have no idea what point you’re trying to make. That means they have good intentions with the data they’re collecting about the users of their mobile apps?
It does not mean that at all. Nothing about choosing to release a model for free or not has any bearing on whether or not the app will respect the privacy of its users.
OpenAI could feel like they’re making enough money off of their proprietary model that they don’t need to collect data (I’m not saying this is likely), while DeepSeek could have released the model for free hoping mass adoption leads to more app downloads and more data to harvest. I don’t assume either has good intentions.
Thanks for putting other word in my mouth. I never told any of both have good intention, but at least deepseek didn’t promise to release the model to change it’s mind and close source it.
Feel that it is a little better than chatgpt, since they didn’t shit on the face of the community yet.
I am sure both collect data, and I wouldn’t thrust them with sensitive informations.
The point I’m trying to make is that I don’t think the CCP cares about the users of deepseek mobile app when they already have an ocean of data from tiktok. That’s the real trojan horse.
Mobile access to an LLM is a similarity.
The big difference between chatgpt and deepseek is the open model weights.
You think them already invasively farming user data from tiktok somehow makes them less likely to do the same thing with another app, and not more likely?
If someone stole $1000 from you and then asked to borrow $20, would you give it to them? Surely they won’t steal that too, they already have $1000.
I run deepseek locally so obviously I appreciate that they made that decision, but let’s not pretend that something can’t be given away for free with bad intentions. People running LLMs locally are a drop in the bucket compared to people just downloading an app.
Bad intentions?
The Chinese governmentDeepseek showed that the OpenAI emperor had no clothes.I have no idea what point you’re trying to make. That means they have good intentions with the data they’re collecting about the users of their mobile apps?
That mean they have at least less bad intentions than chatgpt at least the opened their model on contrary of chatgpt.
It does not mean that at all. Nothing about choosing to release a model for free or not has any bearing on whether or not the app will respect the privacy of its users.
OpenAI could feel like they’re making enough money off of their proprietary model that they don’t need to collect data (I’m not saying this is likely), while DeepSeek could have released the model for free hoping mass adoption leads to more app downloads and more data to harvest. I don’t assume either has good intentions.
Thanks for putting other word in my mouth. I never told any of both have good intention, but at least deepseek didn’t promise to release the model to change it’s mind and close source it. Feel that it is a little better than chatgpt, since they didn’t shit on the face of the community yet. I am sure both collect data, and I wouldn’t thrust them with sensitive informations.
The point I’m trying to make is that I don’t think the CCP cares about the users of deepseek mobile app when they already have an ocean of data from tiktok. That’s the real trojan horse.
Mobile access to an LLM is a similarity. The big difference between chatgpt and deepseek is the open model weights.
You think them already invasively farming user data from tiktok somehow makes them less likely to do the same thing with another app, and not more likely?
If someone stole $1000 from you and then asked to borrow $20, would you give it to them? Surely they won’t steal that too, they already have $1000.
I’m not saying it’s less likely. I’m saying there is a completely different reason for deepseek to exist.