Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

What governments do is, generally, much more important than what they say. And what they're doing here is moving in the direction of restriction
 help



No, what they've been doing so far is changing nothing.

What they are saying is that they won't be changing anything.

That could of course change overnight.

There are multiple aspects to this: China is cottoning on to the meaning of soft power, and besides that being a major supplier of AI related models, services and hardware further cements their place in the world economy. They may not be able to compete directly with the USA in this domain but they are able to undercut them.

Of course there are risks as well. Models produced and released into the wild for which you have not seen the training and conditioning data could have payloads that you'd rather not have. But the same thing goes for service providers in other countries as well. You can't really trust hosted inference, not to tell you the truth in so far as is was present in the training data (censorship, not inference errors) and not to leak your information.


The proposed export controls do add some categories where export is completely prohibited. For example, sandbox detection. While the provisions specifically for AI models are generous enough, it's still possible that they trigger some other prohibition by being too capable. The statement about encouraging open source only applies to cases where export is merely restricted, not prohibited, and even then companies need to report their intention to export in advance, in principle giving the government the opportunity to deny them an export license.

So they're changing some things.


Also a lot of countries that can't trust the US -cough Maduro cough- will choose Chinese AI solutions.

“Mind people's actions over words.“ -Zed

“Right now, your government is doing things you think only other governments do.” -Van Halen, Right Now


Care to substantiate that? Not that I disagree, just curious.

My (not thorougly informed) take is that they are are taking measures to have the capability of restriction but are also adding provisions so that this capability does not add friction to the current practice of enabling export of open weight models.

So to me it's like they are keeping their options open rather than leaning on one versus the other.


I think you're contradicting yourself here.

What they will do remains to be seen. The document at hand is what they're saying.

I.e. less important if we follow your own assessment.


I would find it surprising if the chinese government wanted to allow Anthropic/OpenAI/Google levels of influence on the public opinion and regulatory environment without guardrails. OSS models make AI a replaceable commodity and reduce the potential for market/opinion capture by the frontier labs.

Jetson Nano(with Nintendo Switch SoC) used to require a signed form with restrictions like that for US export control compliance even in a democratic country. It's the same device as the one that was always there, except you were only familiar with its operating end being around yourself.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: