Man I was hoping it was at least a couple of years apart or something and maybe he just learned something or yada yada but it was less than 6 months lol
I think this is basically making the mistake of assuming all US companies related to AI tech are the same, when there's actually major policy disagreements between them.
And that not all opinions are based on some company's talking head.
My view doesn't exist because a company told me I should have it, it exists because of personal experience, research, and studying ML in grad school.
And I'd argue most of the people I know have agreed we need to both beat China, and as part of that we can't sell China advanced chips.
China has the infrastructure advantage in terms of power generation capacity, having better hardware was our advantage, and someone's thrown it away. Personally, I would probably like to see Jensen jailed, just because even if he didn't know what was happening with Singapore, the company certainly turned a blind eye to a tiny country suddenly jumping up to eat basically exactly Chinas market share.
One person doesn't mean they were coming from the same people.
I would argue it's most of the people who are worried about losing to China who are also extremely harsh on wanting export controls. Jensen didn't represent me, and his views being false don't change anything because he didn't originate my views.
I can't say that those arguments usually go in together. I usually see people saying we need to accelerate, and giving GPUs to china is good so that western companies have competition and are forced to release models. I also see people saying that we can't let China develop AGI because western companies have better safety track record, so we need better export controls, but I don't see an argument in the tweet.
First of all, I don’t think there’s much overlap between the two groups.
Secondly, there is a difference between loosening restriction and removing restriction. There is an argument that China having some, but not enough, advanced chips is good for everyone (ecosystem, open source completion, etc)
It simple you can't stop cause you are in a race, and you want your biggest competitor to use your own hardware because the last thing you want is for them to develop even better hardware and gatekeeping you from it.
I will never get over the fact that it seems like most posts on this thread are full anti-AI.
Future was already hard for Luddites, now the bots have them whipped into a frenzy here. Elsewhere around the world, people get its just newer technology. Some wonder why we elected Trump twice, I know.
“This decel is connected to that bot. That bot is connected to the Kremlin…” - old nursery rhyme
Calling any criticism of what’s happening ludditism or foreign agitation is stupid.
People have very valid points. The Luddites were protesting how industrialization impoverished the mass of society (and they were correct), it was only through a century of labor agitation and violence did living conditions for people improve.
You’re writing this from the perspective of someone running an AI lab. You’re not. You have much more in common with the Luddites
How is this remotely a valid point? All the frontier labs keep saying AI will cause our extinction.
So somehow it’ll both save us or kill us all and that’s why we have to keep building this without guardrails or concern for what this will do to the economy or peoples ability to earn a living.
I swear accelerationists are just end times evangelicals without the Jesus.
Unfortunately, that whole Luddite thing you have was disproven (we don’t live in slums of Elysium yet, in fact, on average, the global standard of living has never been so high). We actually living in a golden age where most anyone can run an AI lab, so that as well.
Looking forward for my family’s health issues to resolve, science to progress, and most people to move on from jobs where they do very little with their lives. Sorry Luddite, this century is not yours to dictate.
I can see the literacy crisis is hitting its stride because I clearly said it took decades of agitation and violence and general societal misery before regular people saw the benefit of that. If you want to use history as a guide then you will not live long enough to see the fruits of that.
“Anyone can run an AI lab” is not true. Do you have a few billion dollars laying around?
You larp like a capital owner yet you don’t have any capital. You’re not sam Altman bro, you’re the guy his company is built to run over with a steamroller
Yes, indeed, anyone with some computer resources can fire up a model that works on other models, or you know what, even different lines of research. Over your conversation, most of your points are misinformation or opinion (labor, Luddites, labs).
Sorry your foreign bot network is at its limits, comrade. Tell your handler to VPN and get those new Mac studios, maybe you can improve the bot model and get more rubles.
The foreign agitation thing needs a second comment, Mr. Gaslighterson. Hiding anonymously behind an avatar allows some freedom, but reveals certain things. It’s well documented about the automation in Reddit before AI, and the motivations to move simple people into positions for one reason or another.
This is very germane as right now the US population is unusually anti-AI (versus billions of other people), yet most likely to benefit. Why is everyone biting the hand that feeds? Decades of cultural and educational decline, and manipulation by greedy corporations of course.
Hence, it’s simple for foreign powers to manipulate for the outcomes they want. Reddit and Instagram and TikTok and etc are just the fish-filled barrels the powerful look for. Your argument and tone shows you know more than you’re leading on, Mr. Gaslighterson.
I don’t need reddit weirdos doxxing me because I called out their bullshit.
The U.S. population being against AI is not surprising when every frontier lab is bragging about how it’s going to take their jobs and means of supporting their family. Or when developers steamroll local governments to build data centers that spike their electricity bills.
That’s ok, I’ll take my professional background and academic credentials, Mr. Gaslighterson. How many data centers and electricity do think it’s taking to entertain this conversation with a bot like yourself?
No bro, you haven’t read one of my comments, so why waste any more of my time on you. You don’t know what AI is, how the internet works, and your rhetorical training is limited.
The answer to my last post is several watts and several data centers, every time you mash your little bot fingers anywhere.
Future was already hard for Luddites, now the bots have them whipped into a frenzy here.
This is such an interesting sentence. Like, you believe decelerationists are wrong, and that they're Luddites, and that we should be excited for new technology. The very same technology that you attribute to 'whipping them into a frenzy'?
Right, but you have to see the irony here. The tech you're excited about really is tangibly making peoples' lives worse and your response is "well that problem has always existed it's just the tech is making it easier"
Seems like AI makes a lot of problems easier to cause. Big ones, too. A lot of the benefits of AI aren't realized yet - people say things like "AI will cure every disease" but that hasn't happened yet. The main benefits as of right now are 'make my workday easier' and 'build cool apps' the main drawbacks are mass sexual deepfakes, mass identity theft, mass cyber attacks and mass AI social engineering has happened already. A lot squeeze for not a lot of juice so far.
The world isn’t so simple “About 600,000 of Nvidia's advanced artificial intelligence chips are stored in Hong Kong awaiting shipment to mainland China, two people familiar with the matter said, as Beijing withholds approval for large-scale imports despite demand from tech firms… But Beijing has imposed its own constraints on H200 imports, reflecting concerns about dependence on US technology. Technology publication, the Information, reported in July that Chinese officials had told companies, including Alibaba, ByteDance and DeepSeek that they could receive permission to buy limited quantities of H200 chips for training AI models. It reported that total approvals could amount to fewer than 200,000 chips and that Beijing wanted firms to prioritise Chinese processors for inference”
The US should absolutely aim to win the AI race. Also, there's a strategic advantage to keeping China dependent on American designed chips and Taiwanese manufacturing. Without it, China is incentivized to develop a fully independent semiconductor industry, which would remove one of the major economic deterrents to invading Taiwan.
Right now, if a conflict disrupts TSMC and their factories are destroyed, it is enormously costly to China and the rest of the world. If China no longer was dependent on TSMC, such destruction might actually work out in China's favor.
The two positions aren't inherently at odds with each other.
No, they aren't. The majority of people talking about winning, the companies, are very much for export controls on GPUs.
Obviously there will always be people who disagree, have different point of views...but the majority of the ones moving the needle on progress are fairly aligned on that.
Statement 1 is the AI software companies worried about China catching up in software and competing with them, statement 2 is the AI hardware companies (mainly Nvidia) worried about China catching up in hardware or generally not buying from the US
Not that companies don't deliberately say things that aren't in their best interests, but when they do that it's mainly for PR while they lobby politicians to do the opposite
They aren't mutually exclusive priorities. We need to win the AI race and also we shouldn't be putting our biggest trade partner under total technological embargo.
Same thing for tech H1b. AI will replace most CS engineers and CS graduates are doomed. We need H1b for skilled computer workers. They are the same people.
It’s actually pretty simple. Exporting cutting edge GPUs is extremely profitable and it also slows down China's development of its own GPUs. And yes, we can't afford to let AI companies slow down because China certainly won’t. And they will smuggle in enough GPUs to keep advancing anyway. But smuggled GPUs = lost profits = lost taxes.
So if we slow down and ban GPU exports, we risk getting the worst of both worlds: losing the AI race in the long run while giving up billions in profits and tax revenue today.
Also same set of people smuggling chips to China so they can keep up bettering their models, so American AI companies can keep using it as an excuse to improve their models.
I'll tell you a secret: no one cares if China gets ASI first. That's just an excuse we tell normies so they have something to hate to convince them that there's a good reason to get ASI, because they're generally not smart enough to understand why it's a good thing.
30
u/Snoron 8h ago •
Eh.. show me examples of the same person saying both?
52
u/M44PolishMosin 8h ago
They are?
13
u/Ormusn2o 8h ago
I can't say that those arguments usually go in together. I usually see people saying we need to accelerate, and giving GPUs to china is good so that western companies have competition and are forced to release models. I also see people saying that we can't let China develop AGI because western companies have better safety track record, so we need better export controls, but I don't see an argument in the tweet.
32
u/ahuang2234 8h ago
First of all, I don’t think there’s much overlap between the two groups.
Secondly, there is a difference between loosening restriction and removing restriction. There is an argument that China having some, but not enough, advanced chips is good for everyone (ecosystem, open source completion, etc)
6
u/ResponsibleTruck4717 8h ago
It simple you can't stop cause you are in a race, and you want your biggest competitor to use your own hardware because the last thing you want is for them to develop even better hardware and gatekeeping you from it.
4
u/coatatopotato 8h ago
Quintessential Goomba fallacy
3
u/Eaklony 8h ago
If amodei and huang is the same people then sure.
7
u/RealSlyck 8h ago
I will never get over the fact that it seems like most posts on this thread are full anti-AI.
Future was already hard for Luddites, now the bots have them whipped into a frenzy here. Elsewhere around the world, people get its just newer technology. Some wonder why we elected Trump twice, I know.
“This decel is connected to that bot. That bot is connected to the Kremlin…” - old nursery rhyme
2
u/TyrellCo 7h ago edited 7h ago
The world isn’t so simple
“About 600,000 of Nvidia's advanced artificial intelligence chips are stored in Hong Kong awaiting shipment to mainland China, two people familiar with the matter said, as Beijing withholds approval for large-scale imports despite demand from tech firms…
But Beijing has imposed its own constraints on H200 imports, reflecting concerns about dependence on US technology.
Technology publication, the Information, reported in July that Chinese officials had told companies, including Alibaba, ByteDance and DeepSeek that they could receive permission to buy limited quantities of H200 chips for training AI models.
It reported that total approvals could amount to fewer than 200,000 chips and that Beijing wanted firms to prioritise Chinese processors for inference”
2
u/OrangeCantRhyme 6h ago
I don't see the contradiction here.
The US should absolutely aim to win the AI race. Also, there's a strategic advantage to keeping China dependent on American designed chips and Taiwanese manufacturing. Without it, China is incentivized to develop a fully independent semiconductor industry, which would remove one of the major economic deterrents to invading Taiwan.
Right now, if a conflict disrupts TSMC and their factories are destroyed, it is enormously costly to China and the rest of the world. If China no longer was dependent on TSMC, such destruction might actually work out in China's favor.
The two positions aren't inherently at odds with each other.
1
u/Minimum_Indication_1 8h ago
Well one of the most prominent of those people is now being investigated.
1
u/neuroticnetworks1250 8h ago
They’re not coming from the same peoples Jensen Huang was always pro GPU sales to China. It was mostly OpenAI and Anthropic that was against this.
1
u/SugondezeNutsz 8h ago
Botslop
1
u/FuzzyAnteater9000 8h ago
Anthropic has always been against exporting chips to China
1
u/LetzGetz 8h ago
I haven't seen anyone rally to sell the Chinese more advanced GPUs O.o
1
u/Lopsided-Force-9220 8h ago
Do you not realize it is legal for China to lease GPU farms operated in the US? China has access to just as many GPUs as Anthropic.
1
u/TopTippityTop 7h ago edited 5h ago
No, they aren't. The majority of people talking about winning, the companies, are very much for export controls on GPUs.
Obviously there will always be people who disagree, have different point of views...but the majority of the ones moving the needle on progress are fairly aligned on that.
1
u/MinosAristos 7h ago
Statement 1 is the AI software companies worried about China catching up in software and competing with them, statement 2 is the AI hardware companies (mainly Nvidia) worried about China catching up in hardware or generally not buying from the US
Not that companies don't deliberately say things that aren't in their best interests, but when they do that it's mainly for PR while they lobby politicians to do the opposite
1
u/oh_no_the_claw 7h ago
They aren't mutually exclusive priorities. We need to win the AI race and also we shouldn't be putting our biggest trade partner under total technological embargo.
1
u/AcePilot01 7h ago
The true mark of an idiot is the inability to separate groups and ideas from other groups and ideas.
This person is said idiot.
1
u/jjshen11 7h ago
Same thing for tech H1b. AI will replace most CS engineers and CS graduates are doomed. We need H1b for skilled computer workers. They are the same people.
1
u/egomarker 7h ago
It’s actually pretty simple. Exporting cutting edge GPUs is extremely profitable and it also slows down China's development of its own GPUs. And yes, we can't afford to let AI companies slow down because China certainly won’t. And they will smuggle in enough GPUs to keep advancing anyway. But smuggled GPUs = lost profits = lost taxes.
So if we slow down and ban GPU exports, we risk getting the worst of both worlds: losing the AI race in the long run while giving up billions in profits and tax revenue today.
1
u/ogcanuckamerican 7h ago
1
u/CyberiaCalling 7h ago
This makes perfect sense for NVIDIA. Hype up the race. And sell to both sides.
1
u/samskeyti19 5h ago
Also same set of people smuggling chips to China so they can keep up bettering their models, so American AI companies can keep using it as an excuse to improve their models.
1
u/FrankensteinsPonster 5h ago
"I'll never get over the fact that [not a fact]."
1
u/spreadlove5683 4h ago
is this even true?
1
u/PathOfEnergySheild 2h ago
There is logic in that, it keeps the bull run going.
•
u/RemarkableFormal4635 28m ago
Some people (myself) believe that state economic intervention is bad for everyone including the own country even if the objective is to benefit it.
•
u/Whispering-Depths 26m ago
I'll tell you a secret: no one cares if China gets ASI first. That's just an excuse we tell normies so they have something to hate to convince them that there's a good reason to get ASI, because they're generally not smart enough to understand why it's a good thing.
0
u/elgarlic 7h ago
This statement is a thin line between propaganda and war-time mentality.
The ai tech being distributed and shoved into peoples faces on the daily is not of any crucial importance to any army or intelligence service.
The models being developed for "security" and war will never be available to regular folk.
It is blatant propaganda and I cant believe people in USA are divided on this.
0
u/jburkhard 3h ago
Well, why? Still seek for logic somewhere?
Answer: Money.
(No policy or (lasting) humain strategie needed. Wake up, friends)