• kboos1@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Being the pioneer means doing the heavy lifting and making mistakes. So makes sense, China can learn for others mistakes

    • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’d only make sense if this was a total investment thing, but it’s not. America is investing at a higher rate yet China is getting more returns. Who started first is irrelevant here.

      • REDACTED@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        24 hours ago

        Im not sure how that cancels out what they said. One of their first models said “I’m ChatGPT” when asked who are you and it was rumored they used OpenAI model outputs for training.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          But the problem there is that China is clearly ahead of America now when it comes to AI, so if that was it they wouldn’t be getting higher fuel efficiency anymore.

          • hirihit640@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            China is clearly ahead of America

            Well that’s debatable. The article implies that the US is still ahead. The root comment of this thread implies that the US is still ahead. Your earlier comment made no mention of this idea. Clearly if that was part of your argument you should have brought it up earlier

            • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              The article implies that the US is still ahead.

              The whole point of the article is that it’s not (or at least not enough for the disparity we’re seeing).

              The root comment of this thread implies that the US is still ahead.

              No, it implies it was ahead at one point (which is obviously true)

              Its investment lags far behind America’s. Its models do not

              Their models appear only fractionally less powerful owing to this frugality. K3, an advanced model launched last month by Moonshot AI, a Beijing-based startup, is 95% as clever (on widely used benchmarks) as Fable 5, a frontier model from Anthropic, another top American lab. It is also 70% cheaper to use. On August 3rd Alibaba, a Chinese tech giant, released a model which reportedly scored among the world’s best by some measures.

              See also: Chinese models showing up at or near the top in leaderboards. Admittedly it seems I was wrong about China being clearly ahead, but what little gap exists is far from enough to explain the disparity in investment efficacy.

              • hirihit640@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                little gap exists is far from enough to explain the disparity in investment efficacy.

                This is difficult to say. From what I’ve seen AI gains are slowing down, so catching up might not be that hard anymore. We’ll see from here if China is able to pull a clear lead. If so, then that’s clear evidence that they aren’t just copying

      • Rioting Pacifist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        2 days ago

        Oh come on all of AI is built on stolen tech, you can’t get mad at China for playing by the same rules as everyone else.

      • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Which is great. Intellectual property is innovation-stifling cancer. I’d certainly rather China have the tech to make all those EVs than leave the West to hoard it.

      • Miller@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        The problem with not doing the heavy lifting yourself and using derived technology and ideas is that in evolutionary terms you are not selecting for innovators. Down the road this approach becomes ingrained both philosophically and in reality as you let your own innovators wither on the vine.

        • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Yeah China’s VERY good at reverse engineering stuff and playing catch up. Haven’t really seen them take a clear lead in developing new technology in any field though.

          • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            That’s more due to the lack of new technology these days. AI aside most modern engineering is incremental improvements to existing technology—that’s the innovation everyone is doing.

            • frongt@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              GenAI? Self-driving cars? Robots? Materials science?

              All science and innovation is incremental, but some have bigger impacts than others.

              • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                In order:

                GenAI?

                I said “AI aside” for a reason.

                Self-driving cars?

                Fair enough, though I don’t hear much about those these days.

                Robots? Materials science?

                No idea what’s going on with materials science, but robots aren’t exactly new, so this is incremental improvement to existing technology.