Top
Best
New

Posted by akrylov 21 hours ago

The US is winning the AI race where it matters most: commercialization(avkcode.github.io)
204 points | 555 commentspage 2
munk-a 13 hours ago|
Is the US actually winning the commercialization war? The US is definitely delivering more commercial products but if all of those products are deeply unprofitable and need to buy users with unrealistic discounts (or direct cash payments[1]) to keep their DAU's looking good then is that winning?

There's a significant amount of innovation happening, but if the market decides this AI thing is not worth funding then I think that'll dry up overnight.

1. https://thenextweb.com/news/anthropic-private-equity-venture...

giancarlostoro 21 hours ago||
One interesting thing that Anthropic did was putting their stack on the various cloud providers, I wonder if they'll put it on GCP and Azure next since they've put it into AWS first at a level we have not seen a major AI provider do to date. Your company can have their own Claude stack just like an ELK stack on your cloud, if they can do this for both Azure and GCP then OpenAI has to really catch up.

In my eyes I would rather use the AI I can run on my own paid infrastructure, so if there's an outage its isolated, or I could potentially have a different region / DC to fallback on.

I'm still surprised that neither Microsoft nor Amazon have made their own models available on their cloud offerings. I guess Microsoft probably does have Phi on there, but it's not front and center, especially with something like Copilot for Devs (seriously Microsoft rebrand that damn thing to be clear what you mean by Copilot!) where they could use the cheaper compute by using something like Phi.

nl 9 hours ago||
Claude is available on Azure and GCP already.

https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/blog/introducing-anthropic...

https://docs.cloud.google.com/gemini-enterprise-agent-platfo...

Claude has been available on AWS Bedrock for a long time too.

The new "Claude Platform" announcement was about an Anthropic operated version on AWS (as opposed to self-operated on Bedrock). See the differences here: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/build-with-claude/claude...

> In my eyes I would rather use the AI I can run on my own paid infrastructure,

Claude has been available like that for quite a while.

One of the reasons for the OpenAI divorce from MS was so they could become available on AWS where they see significant demand, and being available only on Azure was holding them back.

SubiculumCode 21 hours ago|||
The recent deal with SpaceX AI to use their severely underutilized GPU compute is pretty telling to me. Being able to roll out compute is a hardware problem, rolling out good models needs more than compute, it needs good AI engineers. SpaceX, Amazon et al can do hardware very well. AI engineering, maybe not so much.
NitpickLawyer 21 hours ago||
Claude is already on Vertex - https://docs.cloud.google.com/vertex-ai/generative-ai/docs/p...
giancarlostoro 21 hours ago|||
Is Vertex hosting it themselves on their own hardware? Because GCP, Azure and AWS all host it on their own hardware, but AWS lets you do everything that Claude lets you do if you use their APIs directly, and then some. This is what I want to see on Azure and GCP, and heck, maybe even DigitalOcean, if they ever stop expanding into so many spaces and focus on improving their current infrastructure, before I fully migrate off of them.
NitpickLawyer 20 hours ago||
> Is Vertex hosting it themselves on their own hardware?

Yes, you can even choose regions, for EU they serve it from Belgium. With all the encrypted at rest stuff and other guarantees that vertex provides.

> Important: Accessing Claude models through Vertex AI meets the FedRAMP High requirements, and operates within the Google Cloud FedRAMP High authorization boundary.

mark_l_watson 14 hours ago|||
yes, and Claude is available on Google AntiGravity with some paid accounts.
lemoncookiechip 12 hours ago||
This makes no sense when you zoom-out. None of these companies, be it Anthropic, OpenAI, xAI, Google, Meta, Microsoft, are profitable in the AI department, they're all bleeding money and using funds their parent company and/or investors, primarily investors gave them. The Chinese models are keeping up with them, while offering the models for free and able to run on consumer grade hardware, and more importantly they train them for cheap. AI models are an extremely volatile product that can be outdated in the matter of a few weeks. Meaning you have to keep dumping resources into developing better models which has no end-goal besides infinite scaling. Lets look at how users behave in the real world:"I don't use Gemini because it's worse than Claude at XYZ." That's it. Now Gemini has a worse model and people are going to Anthropic... what happens when Anthropics model is arguably worse than everyone else's? What does it matter if they can commercialize if their product is objectively worse?

I understand that America dominates in distribution, integration, enterprise contracts, ecosystems, infra... The article isn't wrong, it's just that that dominance is fragile and requires constant upgrading.

But what is the point of that if you have to infinitely scale because the opposition is right behind you at all times ready to usurp you... You CANNOT scale infinitely, the VC money will run out at some point and then everyone will have to downscale everything to meet the real costs associated with SOTA models, they'll have to be able to use subscriptions, and other monetization to cover those insane costs, we just saw SORA shut down because it was bleeding money far too fast while the Chinese released video models that far surpassed it back to back to back...

EDIT: Hell, one of the most critical aspects is integration of the models into other products, and even on this end open-source is keeping up (and will eventually outpace when the VC money dries out) with these big companies.

nl 11 hours ago||
> None of these companies, be it Anthropic, OpenAI, xAI, Google, Meta, Microsoft, are profitable in the AI department,

Citation needed.

All reporting is that they are profitable on the inference side and all the VC money is going to building more data centers to run more inference. (Note that the coding subscription models are probably only break even on average - the money is in the API)

> The Chinese models are keeping up with them, while offering the models for free and able to run on consumer grade hardware, and more importantly they train them for cheap.

No one is running DeepSeek v4 (a 1.6T token model) on consumer hardware.

They aren't much cheaper to train the US models. Training is subsidized by the big Chinese tech companies. They are slightly cheaper because they are smaller (and weaker) models than the 5T and 10T models the US frontier labs are training, and the US labs are paying for a more diverse set of RL data (which shows up in diverse benchmark performance).

> we just saw SORA shut down because it was bleeding money far too fast while the Chinese released video models that far surpassed it back to back to back...

Ironically this proves the point.

OpenAI didn't shutdown Sora, just the subscription version and weird social network thing. You can still access it via API.

The Chinese models are API models and probably just as profitable for them as the LLMs are for the US frontier labs.

[1] has prices for video models. There is a big range, but Google's Veo model and OpenAI's Sora are around the same price as the Chinese models.

[1] https://openrouter.ai/models?output_modalities=video

strange_quark 10 hours ago||
What does profitable on inference mean? As far as I can tell, none of these companies have rigidly defined it, let alone it being a GAAP number. And yeah, if you subtract out all your R&D, payroll, sales, marketing, and other overhead, and get someone else to take on the debt or dig into their free cash flow to build the hugely expensive infrastructure on which you depend, it'd be pretty hard to not be "profitable". It's almost humorous how dumb of a metric "profitable on inference" is.

Ask yourself if AI was so profitable, why don't any of the big hyperscalers break out AI revenue in their earnings. OpenAI and Anthropic both project huge losses for the next couple years, it's not hard to find.

The real problem is, as the GP comment pointed out, that they can never stop training. As long as they're committed to building these behemoth models, the second they stop training, someone else will catch up and everybody will switch over because it's trivial to do so.

nl 9 hours ago||
> OpenAI and Anthropic both project huge losses for the next couple years, it's not hard to find.

No. Anthropic at least expects to be profitable this year:

> Anthropic expects its gross profit margin, which measures how much revenue it makes compared to the cost of producing that revenue—largely from running servers—to swing from negative 94% last year to as much as 50% this year and 77% in 2028.

https://archive.is/GdLGD

> And yeah, if you subtract out all your R&D, payroll, sales, marketing, and other overhead, and get someone else to take on the debt or dig into their free cash flow to build the hugely expensive infrastructure on which you depend, it'd be pretty hard to not be "profitable".

I think excluding capital expense on infrastructure isn't unreasonable and is done in most industries.

It's worth noting that AI infrastructure has turned out to be an unbelievably good investment. Inference on a 4 year old H100 chip costs more now than it did brand new! That makes the hyperscaler's depreciation schedules look very (and unexpectedly!) conservative (!!)

whattheheckheck 11 hours ago||
If the Chinese models couldn't Distill from the larger models they'd be at gpt2 or 3 levels
lemoncookiechip 11 hours ago|||
Even if that is true, it doesn't change the reality that they can compete. Also, if we start going that route, American models wouldn't have any quality data to train on if they respected copyright themselves. Their whole product was built on the work of others, on our work, our art.... without compensation, without acknowledgement.

Literally not a single one of these AI companies, regardless of where they are in the world has any right to complain about someone copying their work.

nl 11 hours ago|||
To quote Elon Musk in court:

> OpenAI’s counsel asked Musk whether xAI has ever “distilled” technology from OpenAI.

> Musk: “Generally AI companies distill other AI companies.”

> “Is that a yes?” Savitt asked.

> Musk: “Partly.”

From https://www.interconnects.ai/p/the-distillation-panic which is worth reading in full.

127 17 hours ago||
Strange. I'm switching from Codex and Claude to Pi with Qwen3.6 27B local and Deepseek V4 Flash which is dirt cheap but powerful.
Kuyawa 14 hours ago||
I've built five apps in the last month using DeepSeek, spending less than $1 in total. I am totally in love with DeepSeek and my wife knows it :)
satvikpendem 12 hours ago||
What sorts of apps are those? I tried testing various models with a test app as a benchmark, a local first app with CRDTs, and many, even frontier models, struggle heavily.
Kuyawa 8 hours ago||
https://mediconsulta.net an AI medical assistant

https://decaboy.fit for tracking progress at they gym

https://megaparley.com sports betting platform

A horse betting platform not published yet, still looking for an API odds provider

A car mechanic AI assistant not published yet

I've learned that the more detailed the initial prompt the better result I get. I can share any prompt if you want

schaefer 15 hours ago||
and you're not alone (I run Qwen 3.6 35B-A3B at home too).

But just for the sake of discussion, let me ask: Who is the service provider you're using to run Deepseek V4? Do you have any way of knowing whether that compute is happening in the US or abroad?

thepasch 21 hours ago||
Article title: “The US is winning the AI Race”

Article content: “The US are capitalizing on AI the best”

A lot of assumptions there that no one can actually verify as true right now. If commercialization into rent-seeking SaaS landscapes is the endgame, then yeah, the US is winning the AI race. If individualization, local LLMs, and consumer hardware are the endgame, China is winning the AI race. If it’s something entirely different - if LLMs are the wall and research is what grants the next breakthrough, or if compute and memory requirements take a dive, or whatever; then we have no idea who’s winning the race because that stuff is mostly happening behind closed doors.

SubiculumCode 21 hours ago||
That seems like a lot of rationalization to me. China is pursuing these because they cannot compete on the frontier. Yes, there is a possibility that all that compute is not needed, but it is a rather remote possibility, and there is no doubt that, given the choice, China would be pursuing frontier model building with closed, propietary-only offerings.
nradov 17 hours ago|||
All that compute is not needed. We have an existence proof from biology in the form of natural intelligence that much greater efficiency is possible. However, achieving dramatic improvements in compute efficiency will depend on unpredictable scientific breakthroughs. Personally I suspect that an entirely new hardware architecture will be needed, although I don't have any hard evidence to back that up.
logicchains 16 hours ago|||
>We have an existence proof from biology in the form of natural intelligence that much greater efficiency is possible.

It's only a proof that it's possible with 18+ years of training.

nradov 14 hours ago||
In certain ways my dog has more generalized intelligence than any LLM, and I trained her in only a few months with a modest investment in dog treats.
ribosometronome 17 hours ago|||
>from biology ... much greater efficiency is possible

Those are much more specialized models with pretty mediocre tokens per second.

pwndByDeath 17 hours ago|||
Perhaps tokens is a dead end?
SpicyLemonZest 17 hours ago||
Perhaps! But perhaps whatever human brains use instead of tokens is not as amenable to scaling or copying.
Hasslequest 17 hours ago|||
[dead]
Matl 17 hours ago||||
I dunno, DeepSeek v4 Pro is rather on par as far as I can tell, maybe not with 5.5 Pro in all areas quite yet, but close.

I think China is thinking more about the application layer on top of models as going to matter more than the models themselves, so they don't need to gatekeep the models as much.

seanmcdirmid 17 hours ago||||
China is competing in value AI because they cannot work at the frontier, but how is this bad at all? It’s like how the USA has the best drones but they are a few million dollars apiece while China has DJI.

If China could work at the frontier, I don’t know, I kind of think they would still be dumping a lot of resources into exploring the value side since they have that culture already in place.

SubiculumCode 17 hours ago||
I did not imply it was bad. I implied that competing in value AI is the only option that China-based AI companies have due to limitations in compute.
seanmcdirmid 12 hours ago||
This is true, but I don't think they would all be rushing to frontier if that option was available. Chinese are used to working with constraints to their benefit, they would see the price of working at frontier and make hard choices that maybe we can ignore in the states.
cyberge99 20 hours ago||||
Forgive me if this is a naive assumption, but wouldn’t large language models be fundamentally different for a language that is largely symbols? Again, my understanding of Mandarin is limited if it exists at all.
doph 20 hours ago|||
All tokens are symbols. All of the frontier models speak Mandarin.
boothby 18 hours ago||
This is why misspellings and homophones are tells of human righting. LLMs strongly prefer word-level tokens, and word substitutions follow semantic similarity and not the more human auditory similarity.
omneity 17 hours ago|||
Funny, I’ve been cracking[0] at this exact problem with a purpose-built model[1]:

0: https://huggingface.co/posts/omarkamali/593639295164067

1: https://omneitylabs.com/models/sawtone

jddj 15 hours ago||||
Claude the other day wrote code where one of the bytes in the array was 0xO5.

That's zero ex oh (the letter) five

mejutoco 18 hours ago|||
> righting.

> LLMs strongly prefer word-level tokens, and word substitutions follow semantic similarity and not the more human auditory similarity.

Is this an elaborate joke or your full-word misspelling of writing is both agreeing with your statement (word substitutions) and contradicting it (not semantic but only pronunciation similarity)

calfuris 17 hours ago|||
I don't see the contradiction, unless you believe that the grandparent comment was written by an LLM.
wat10000 16 hours ago|||
"飞机" and "airplane" aren't fundamentally different in terms of how they're represented to a computer. Especially for an LLM, where tokenization likely turns each of those into a single token.
throwaway27448 18 hours ago||||
> China is pursuing these because they cannot compete on the frontier.

? Claude, ChatGPT, etc are heinously expensive for tiny benefits lmao. Local + efficient is clearly the future

visarga 15 hours ago|||
> ? Claude, ChatGPT, etc are heinously expensive for tiny benefits lmao

Unfortunately local inference is inefficient, 100s of times more inefficient than cloud. When you answer one request at a time you still have to fetch all active weights into compute units, once every token. When you run a batch of 300, you load it once and compute 300 at a time.

Compared to cloud, local inference is less flexible. You can't scale up 5x or 20x, can't have spikes, and pay for it no matter if you use it or not. But usage factor is very low, like 5%. And to run a decent model your system costs $2000 or more.

ToucanLoucan 18 hours ago||||
AI boosters cling to this notion because it's the only way the massive data center buildouts make any sense at all. I guess you could say the US is winning the frontier AI race. Okay. I'm never going to grant a cloud service access to all the contents of my hard drive, that's just never going to happen, so if you expect me and a lot of people like me who feel similarly to get on this train, you better have a local, lightweight model too or we're not even having a discussion, the answer is just no.
Our_Benefactors 18 hours ago||
The thing is, frontier model providers don’t take your feelings into account even a little bit. It’s totally irrelevant to the discussion about the service they can provide, because that service is predicated on access to high power GPU slices that local models can’t touch. Those providers won’t be in an existential crisis because some people choose the privacy route, it’s a cost of doing business.
ToucanLoucan 17 hours ago||
Right but that service being sold is predicated on products being sold to users, yes? Or are we still pretending that the hyperscalers can just pass the same $20 billion between themselves and that's going to be a growth industry forever?
ElevenLathe 17 hours ago|||
I suppose its possible that all the value to pay back the datacenter construction can be squeezed out of enterprise contracts where your employer can assent on the privacy questions, probably with some kind of complicated contract and insurance regime regulating things.

Even if so, if China is coming behind 6 months later selling laptops with hyper-efficient local models that are 80% as good as "frontier" ones, I imagine they'll get the consumer business AND a fair share of the enterprise business as IT managers look at their options during the next refresh cycle.

Given economies of scale, I think it's ultimately inevitable that the enterprise more-or-less follows the consumer on this, and the consumer is going to prefer local models. There's no ongoing cost after the initial purchase, and your data at least nominally stays within your control.

ToucanLoucan 16 hours ago||
I'm inclined to agree. The business world itself, and frankly you could make this argument about the entire AI industry as it were, runs on "fine" and 80% capable can probably get you there. And it's arguably even better for the hyperscalers since then, ongoing costs of AI users are basically nil. You can still have your massive datacenters and just keep them for tasks complex enough that they're actually worth spooling up.

Like I don't need an H100 or a dozen to summarize a PDF. And that's most of what I use AI for.

Our_Benefactors 16 hours ago|||
If we are betting on which is an easier sale, $20-100 a month w/tech support included vs $5k-10k and a requirement for moderate technical ability, I would invest in the former not the latter being the proposition that drives the conversation about AI use.
ericmay 18 hours ago|||
> ? Claude, ChatGPT, etc are heinously expensive for tiny benefits lmao. Local + efficient is clearly the future

Corporate America is where the money is, and corporate America will dictate what products are successful by virtue of spend. Individuals aren't going to be paying $100s or $1000s/month en masse for these models but businesses will be. Being local and efficient isn't that important at this stage but even so as American companies continue to scale and invest they'll be able to make those models more local and efficient if the market wants it. Sort of like how you had a big, giant desktop computer and now you've got a super computer in your phone which is in your pocket. Going straight to "local and efficient" means going straight to being behind because at some point, perhaps now even, the local and efficient model won't be able to keep up.

For some reason people think that they somehow know something that Google or Nvidia or whoever, with hundreds of billions of dollars of real money at stake don't already know and it's both amusing and bizarre to see this play out again and again in off-hand comments like "lol tiny benefits".

You buy an iPhone even though the cheap-o Wal-Mart Android phone for $100 "does the same thing". Except that in this case the Android phone just puts you out of business while those spending big money for "tiny benefits" beat you in the market.

throwaway27448 15 hours ago|||
Corporate america is the past. Momentum is carrying capital out of the country. Pay attention to rate of change.
ericmay 15 hours ago||
What source are you using for your claim that capital is flowing out of the country? I'm curious to read more about it.
throwaway27448 14 hours ago||
I don't think that's a particularly bold claim after thirty straight years of moving supply chains overseas. Capital is, inherently, the means of production. The world where we could compete is gone.
ericmay 14 hours ago||
Capital is not the means of production. Capital is capital. If I have a few million dollars in my bank account I don’t all of a sudden have a factory. Remember from economics class you need capital, labor, and the means of production.

Capital inflows are different from manufacturing outflows. The US has historically imported capital which is part of why we have such a large trade imbalance. I’d encourage you to do some more digging here.

> The world where we could compete is gone.

Sigh no that’s just not true at all. We compete hard and fast all day everyday, economy is growing and will continue to do so, and no amount of leftist doomer, Chinese, Iranian, or Russian propaganda changes those facts.

throwaway27448 13 hours ago||
> I have a few million dollars in my bank account I don’t all of a sudden have a factory.

No but money only has value because of a product of the human labor and production capacity it refers to. Money is not capital, it is a reference to/legal coercion of capital

> We compete hard and fast all day everyday

Sir have you ever been to the us? Lmao. We are only competitive in the industry of white collar work (financial/artisanal services), an industry that capital is actively gutting

ericmay 12 hours ago||
> No but money only has value because of a product of the human labor and production capacity it refers to. Money is not capital, it is a reference to/legal coercion of capital

These are just strings of words without meaning or importance.

> Sir have you ever been to the us? Lmao. We are only competitive in the industry of white collar work (financial/artisanal services), an industry that capital is actively gutting

Yes, I live here. Why are you posting obviously untrue and asinine statements like this? Go look at the Fortune 500. There ya go. What other evidence do you need? And not only are you writing dumb things here, your original post was wrong too! Please get off of social media or whatever doomscrolling news you are partaking in because it is bad for your health and perception of reality. The United States by any measure, as a matter of indisputable fact, a highly competitive and dynamic economy across pretty much all sectors. This is not up for debate.

ForHackernews 17 hours ago|||
> You buy an iPhone even though the cheap-o Wal-Mart Android phone for $100 "does the same thing".

People buy iPhones because of status signalling and network effects, neither of which appears to apply to AI model choice. LLMs are already rapidly on the way to being interchangeable commodities.

ericmay 16 hours ago||
No they don't, it's not 2008. Anybody off the street can get an iPhone or a free iPhone with a mobile plan. They're commodity products. Even homeless people have them.

To the extent LLMs are commodity products you're right (so far), but that is limited to the main model providers, such as ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, &c. with interoperability on cloud platform providers and other technology providers like an Apple offering you a choice of LLM with Siri or something.

If you want to suggest that some other model is in the same bucket as those primary 3, it goes back to the crappy, cheap phone analogy which is accurate. Yea you can make calls with it, but you make calls better with an iPhone.

throwaway27448 15 hours ago|||
> free iPhone with a mobile plan

I get your point but in what sense is that "free"? What mobile plan giving you an iphone doesn't come with explicit debt?

ericmay 15 hours ago||
Here's an example from 2025 with a major US carrier - Verizon: https://tech.yahoo.com/phones/deals/articles/want-free-iphon...

They run various schemes like this all the time, you can also trade in your existing phone a lot of times for pretty favorable terms. I've traded in phones that were a few years old and gotten $1000+ for them, especially when switching providers.

throwaway27448 12 hours ago|||
That's not free except at point of sale.
ericmay 12 hours ago||
It’s free enough that my point stands and I’m close-minded to any further discussion about it.
vel0city 14 hours ago|||
Verizon's "free" iPhone deal is you pay for the phone up front and then receive a bill credit. Here's the fine print from one of those deals:

$729.99 purchase on device payment or at retail price required. New line req'd. Unlimited Welcome, Unlimited Plus or Unlimited Ultimate plans required. Less $730 promo credit applied to account over 36 mos; promo credit ends if eligibility requirements are no longer met; 0% APR.Taxes & fees may apply. Credits will appear on your Verizon Wireless bill.

https://www.verizon.com/shop/online/free-5g-phones/

ericmay 14 hours ago||
I don’t know or care much about the specific details but the article was written in 2025. Carriers run deals and give away iPhones or close enough to free or cheap that quibbling about the details is irrelevant.

If you think the iPhone is a status symbol you’re just wrong.

vel0city 13 hours ago||
I'm not the one arguing iPhones are only status symbols. If anything, if I only had the money to spend on a single computing device there's a good chance I'd go for an iPhone due to excellent durability, typically long support timelines, lots of extremely cheap accessories available, high chance of low cost serviceability compared to other devices. There's also a pretty good used marketplace for such devices so picking up one used on the cheap and still getting a few years of use out of it is likely. I'd likely try and stretch to get that device instead of settling for a cheap $100 phone that will be a total piece of junk and end up being my only actual computing device.

I'm just pointing out the statement:

> What mobile plan giving you an iphone doesn't come with explicit debt?

isn't invalidated by some Yahoo article pushing a marketing promo that when you actually do the math and read the fine print its not really a "free" phone, its always some form of debt or bill credit or something along those lines that makes the phone "free". You're still paying for the phone in the end if you read the fine print. In the end one commits to spending several hundred dollars over 36 months or whatever or you pay up front and they give you bill credits if you keep the plan.

ericmay 12 hours ago||
I am arguing they’re not status symbols and using how cheaply available they are as evidence that they’re not. Anyone can get one, some companies run free promotions, some do delayed interest programs, some amortize the price over a 2-year time period. Who cares? The details here weren’t important. Apparently Verizon ran some promo in the past and may again in the future giving away iPhones. Why be so argumentative over something so stupid? Not only are you actually wrong here, you’re arguing over the irrelevant details.
vel0city 11 hours ago||
> Who cares?

People who prefer truth in advertising.

> Why be so argumentative over something so stupid?

I don't want people to believe untrue marketing statements and make poor financial decisions without actually bothering to read the fine print.

> some companies run free promotions

This just isn't true. They're not really "free". They come with lots of financial commitments.

> Apparently Verizon ran some promo in the past and may again in the future giving away iPhones

They still say they do on their website. If you're getting one "free" iPhone it comes with a commitment to spend at least $65/mo for 36 months. A commitment to spend $2,340 is a lot different from $0.

These are far from "free" phones. Can I go into a Verizon store, not give them a dime or sign any contracts and walk out with a phone free and clear to do whatever I want? No? Sounds like it's not really free then!

My point is if you're poor/homeless you're probably not looking to sign a 3-year commitment to spend a few grand to get a "free" phone. A lot of those people won't even pass the credit check to qualify to even sign up for one of these post-paid plans required to get the "free" phone. If you're really broke you would probably be looking at signing up for a lifeline plan and get yourself a cheap used iPhone instead of signing up for a $2,340 contract.

ericmay 8 hours ago||
I already made and proved my point. The iPhone is not a status symbol, and major carriers can and do give them away in various schemes and did so in the past and will continue to do so in the future.

You’re anchoring yourself to one payment scheme and ignoring others and it’s besides the point which is that iPhones aren’t status symbols even if these schemes didn’t exist and iPhones weren’t extremely cheap or freely available.

I don’t have anything left to say here besides that I proved my point unequivocally.

vel0city 8 hours ago||
> The iPhone is not a status symbol

I already said I largely agreed with this.

> major carriers can and do give them away in various schemes and did so in the past and will continue to do so in the future

They only do if you're financially illiterate.

> You’re anchoring yourself to one payment scheme and ignoring others

I'm being honest and taking about the real deal instead of blindly repeating marketing bullshit and lies.

> freely available

A commitment to spend thousands of dollars isn't the same as freely available.

The bank gave me this free house all I have to do is pay this mortgage for thirty years. But hey the house was free!

Once again, was the deal that you could walk into the store, grab a new iPhone, and walk out without signing a contract or other form of commitment? If not, it's not really free. It's bad financial advice for people struggling financially to get one of these "free" phones, they're often more expensive than buying outright and getting a much cheaper (or potentially even subsidized!) plan. Especially if you're just needing one or two lines. Many of these postpaid plans only really make financial sense once you're at like 4+ lines on it.

I'm reminded of seeing all those cell phones in the RadioShack mailer ads back in the day. Only 99¢! Dad, can't I get one? It's only a dollar!.

If you spent hundreds of dollars on box seats to a sporting event and they had a complimentary buffet, is that food really free or did it cost you hundreds of dollars? Would you tell someone struggling with money they could get free food, they just need to go spend hundreds on sports tickets first?

Maybe one shouldn't be so willingly close-minded to the truth.

ForHackernews 3 hours ago|||
Ironically you are participating in the social signalling ("crappy, cheap phone") phenomenon you claim doesn't exist.

https://mashable.com/article/apple-messages-green-doj

https://www.sfgate.com/tech/article/apple-green-bubble-messa...

YetAnotherNick 18 hours ago|||
Well China is consistently 6 months behind the frontier labs(possibly because they can they harvest data from released frontier models). If the scaling continues, US will win, but if not then China will win as the models will converge.
SubiculumCode 18 hours ago||
The non-release of Mythos tell you the future of that, so long as they can keep the weights from being exfiltrated. Once models become true national security threats, they won't be released in their full form. The hitch-a-ride approach becomes less capable of keeping up.
nradov 17 hours ago|||
How would they prevent distillation? That would seem pretty tough to block for any LLM available for commercial use.
philipkglass 14 hours ago|||
This post claims that Opus 4.7 has introduced some detrimental changes to stymie distillation:

https://old.reddit.com/r/Anthropic/comments/1snorbg/the_bigg...

I don't know enough about distillation to understand how much this hinders/slows the process, but it sounds at least superficially plausible.

SubiculumCode 17 hours ago|||
By only providing degraded models to use commercially outside national defense applications would be my guess. As soon as models are a threat in terms of enabling biowarfare etc, then they just are not going to be generally released.

Honestly, I think its quite possible that models will be retrained with gaps in their knowledge. e.g. a coding model for commercial use probably doesn't need to have deep knowledge of biology, and training on biological sciences probably doesn't help those evals much.

Honestly, I'd welcome such an approach.

nradov 17 hours ago||
What a hilariously uninformed comment. LLMs are not the limiting factor in biowarfare.
SubiculumCode 13 hours ago||
LLMs absolutely have the potential to increase the risk of small nation biowarfare and bioterrorism more generally. That you don't believe so is dangerously naive.
YetAnotherNick 15 hours ago|||
We were talking about winning commercially, not on model quality.
zozbot234 17 hours ago|||
"AI in the datacenter" and "AI on local consumer hardware" will eventually be two separate niches with entirely different capabilities, at least if scaling laws continue unchanged and there's no near-term inherent limit to AI smarts. The real point of the datacenter is to be able to do datacenter-scale things. But you don't need that kind of vast compute to run even the largest open models today: on prem hardware can do it easily especially if you're OK with a somewhat delayed response.
m3kw9 17 hours ago|||
even without any of that anyone you ask who's used AI to any professional degree will agree US is winning AI race right now. Future, who knows
aerodexis 20 hours ago|||
[dead]
akrylov 21 hours ago||
[flagged]
giancarlostoro 20 hours ago|||
> US deep state

Strange reading that on HN and realizing I'm not on Facebook

andriy_koval 18 hours ago|||
Its hard not to see that "deep state": group of elite politicians and super-rich, seize more and more power in American society.
adjejmxbdjdn 18 hours ago||
Whatever you think about elite politicians and the super-rich, they’re not the “deep state”.

The whole idea of the deep state is that it’s part of the state, ie government, so not private citizens, and they’re “deep” ie hidden below the layers of government. Thats the exact opposite of politicians and the ultra rich.

Avicebron 18 hours ago||
Lol I'm pretty sure the "deep state" just means, "manipulating the levers of power from a place without accountablity/oversight" which covers both these shadowy hidden layers of govt you describe and the shadowy wealthy elites funding and lobbying for whatever. It can be both.
ambicapter 18 hours ago|||
Sure, anything can mean whatever you want if you redefine anything to suit your whims at the time.
js8 17 hours ago|||
I agree with parent, that's not how right-wing propaganda portrays the deep state. It's a strawman, of unaccountable government bureacrats. It excludes billionaires and dark money in politics (the real problem), they put themselves on the good side. (Remember DOGE?)
andriy_koval 17 hours ago||
term predates that right-wing propaganda
layer8 16 hours ago||
Nevertheless the parent is correct: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_state#United_States
andriy_koval 16 hours ago||
Your link refers to lots of different contexts,cherry picking one of them which you failed to cite to win your nit-picking argument is not productive, because it is just not agreeable.

Also, your link specifically starts with:

""a hybrid association of government elements and parts of top-level industry and finance that is effectively able to govern the United States without reference to the consent of the governed as expressed through the formal political process."

which exactly how this was defined by your opponent.

paganel 18 hours ago|||
Snowden.
SimianSci 18 hours ago|||
ah yes, the "deep state." The formless, nebulous, rhetorical tool that is always infinitely liquid enough to fit into or over any container necessary that the user can satisfy their immense personal problems disguised as eternal doomerism.
badc0ffee 16 hours ago||
I thought it was just an overdramatic term for the unelected bureaucrats that make up the majority of the government, and who have their own institutional momentum.
lorecore 21 hours ago||
It’s certainly too early to call (if you must view this as some sort of adversarial competition). The US is behind on local models, the future for anyone who cares about privacy. There may be step change innovation yet to come that completely shifts the landscape. There’s basically no switching costs to users to change models. They have no lock-in.
SubiculumCode 21 hours ago|
It is very much adversarial, and to view it anything but adversarial is to not see the geopolitical reality and the potential national security implications of AI for what they actually are. Moreover, to claim that China is in the lead with local models presupposes that openai and anthropic could not release local models that are better, which is a big assumption. They do not release such models because they have frontier-grade propietary models that have high value.
lorecore 20 hours ago||
As someone who happens to have been born in the US and currently lives here, I welcome China winning. I trust them infinitely more than I trust my own government and industry.

OpenAI and Anthropic are beholden to the capitalist system they exist under and hence cannot compete on local models. Like you say, they must try to maximize shareholder value. China is unencumbered by that constraint.

46493168 18 hours ago|||
What is it about China that makes you trust them more?
lorecore 17 hours ago|||
They're far less imperialistic and I view them as better global citizens than the US. I think they've cultivated a much richer culture than the US as well.
127 16 hours ago||
You should read about the difference between a land empire and a sea empire.
lorecore 16 hours ago|||
Happy to if you have any pointers. My original point is that the US kills millions of people outside of its borders, something China most definitely does not. The number is over 12 million post-WWII: https://www.worldfuturefund.org/Reports/Imperialism/usmurder...
SubiculumCode 13 hours ago|||
Replace the U.S. with another world power. Would it be better or worse? Its always easy to criticize the power that is in place and treat them as if they are to blame for all the ills of the world. It is easy to criticize when you are the nation that is asked to help provide international security for commerce on the high seas. But exchange another nation in the U.S.'s place, and I guarantee you most would make similar decisions, and many (e.g. Soviet Union) would be, hands down, worse and more brutal.
lorecore 12 hours ago||
No one asked the US to kill millions of Koreans, Vietnamese, Iraqis, Afghans… well maybe Israel for those last two, but they’re a terrorist entity.
127 16 hours ago|||
Well if you discount the people China has killed and is killing within its borders, the number is definitely smaller. As well as another land empire called Russia.
poncho_romero 14 hours ago|||
Any books or articles you recommend?
mghackerlady 18 hours ago|||
not living there, for one. I don't care if they know where I live since realistically they can't do much of anything to me. If I were in china, I probably wouldn't trust them as much as I trust the US. If I were in Switzerland, I wouldn't trust the swiss government and might get my services from america or china.
SubiculumCode 18 hours ago|||
You are free to hate capitalism (even if you benefit from it enormously). You are free to say that you hate capitalism and the U.S. as openly and as often as you like, without facing imprisonment or worse.

But if you were in China, could you say you hate the Chinese Communist Party and China openly and as often as you like without imprisonment or worse?

We know the answer to that. So go ahead and trust China more than the U.S., but I think that is pure foolishness.

mghackerlady 18 hours ago|||
Actually, Chinas free speech, while abysmal, is better than you're making it out to be. They only really care if they see you as a threat, which realistically isn't too far off from the US both currently and historically
SubiculumCode 17 hours ago||
I understand that there is some freedom of speech in China, but I don't think the implication is that US and China are functionally equivalent. In the U.S. you can criticize the president all day every day and have millions of followers. Could you do that in China? The more people listen to you, the more dissident opinions become a threat.
mghackerlady 17 hours ago|||
I'm not suggesting they are the same, rather, that if the US saw you as a real threat you'd be shut up pretty quickly. The threshold for what is considered a big enough threat is different, but they both have the ability to shut you up and have in the past. Any government would act the same, at least a competent one. The governments 0th priority is ensuring its continued existence, since all of the other functions rely on its existence
kennyloginz 16 hours ago|||
Can Comey?
sokka_h2otribe 17 hours ago||||
I think you're missing their point, even if I can agree with part of your premise.

There was an outdated but relevant saying

'In America, you can criticize president Nixon anytime'

'Yes, but in Soviet Union you can also criticize Nixon anytime.'

The point is not that they're safer but that they're not a relevant concern in the same way. (According to OP)

lorecore 17 hours ago||||
I live in a Zionist country (the US) and will absolutely be canceled and blacklisted from my industry (tech) were I to publicly speak out against Zionism. They are attempting to put laws in place to make it illegal to be anti-Zionist. These laws already exist in countries like the UK and Germany. Some, such as anti-BDS laws, already exist in the US as well.

Many technological advances weren't driven by capitalism, early computers and the internet were literally developed by the government.

kennyloginz 16 hours ago|||
You can probably say 864#
TabTwo 2 hours ago||
Whoever says this matters the most.

Thats like Microsoft saying "Don't use Linux because selling an operating system is what matters"

comrade1234 20 hours ago||
I've been using the deepseek api (not for coding though) and have been getting great results and it's so cheap it may as well be free. Another reason I'm using it is because I like the license and I also have some hope of running it in my own hardware in the future.

But the thing is... I could be using any of the llms for my use - I'm using a middleware that lets me change providers only with a configuration change.

So it's going to be tough for USA ai companies to charge 5x to 20x (depending on what you're doing).

usui 21 hours ago||
> where it matters most: commercialization.

It begs the question because both its premise and assertion are already wrong. Has AI improved the industrial capacity of the US in order to improve the lives of its citizens? No it hasn't. Has AI increased the wealth of its citizens by being able to do laundry or any household task in a generalized way? No it hasn't. The only thing it's really done is make very narrow slices of white-collar work more fungible. In what way has AI been able to address existing shortcomings of the US?

comrade1234 20 hours ago||
Amazing. Someone on the internet using 'begs the question' correctly...
mrhottakes 17 hours ago||
Glad I'm not the only one that noticed this.
vasco 17 hours ago|||
You better have some sources for declaring that industrial capacity hasn't increased. The Fed reports around 8% penetration of AI in manufacturing already, but in my opinion it's too early for grand declarations like that without data.

https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/moni...

magicalist 17 hours ago|||
> The Fed reports around 8% penetration of AI in manufacturing already, but in my opinion it's too early for grand declarations like that without data

Based on a survey if the business uses AI "in any of its business functions". And for all uses of what they consider to be AI, not just LLMs.

anonSrEng202309 17 hours ago||||
> ... it's too early for grand declarations like that without data.

You mean grand declarations like 'industrial capacity has increased'? Just because AI is present in the factory doesn't mean it's actually increased capacity.

rudedogg 17 hours ago|||
> The Fed reports

Have you happened to purchase anything in the past 12 months, and looked at the Fed's inflation numbers?

dragonwriter 10 hours ago||
> Have you happened to purchase anything in the past 12 months, and looked at the Fed's inflation numbers?

The Fed doesn't issue inflation numbers. The usually cited headline inflation numbers (CPI) are from the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, the ones used by the Fed as an input to monetary policy decisions (PCE) are issued by the Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analysis.

treis 18 hours ago||
AI has definitely improved the industrial capacity of the US
robotpepi 18 hours ago|||
and of everyone else, right? what service or product is only available to the US? Even with Chinese models lagging behind, the difference in capabilities is not much.
sthwrhstb 17 hours ago||||
Assertions made without evidence can be rejected without evidence.

t. literally works on AI for industrial applications

bigyabai 17 hours ago||||
Computer vision certainly did. But LLMs? That needs citation.
hackable_sand 17 hours ago||||
What capacity?

How?

mrhottakes 17 hours ago|||
Such as?
0xbadcafebee 21 hours ago|
I don't think so. From a nation state perspective, AI is a munition. Every advanced nation is going to have their own cyber division with their own AI hosted within its borders. Considering how xenophobic and belligerent the US is, nobody is going to want their national cyber defenses hosted in the US.

On a personal level, I simply do not trust the US anymore. I won't host any of my personal data in a US company. I don't want the US govt invading my personal privacy, and their corporations are constantly leaking and selling private data. I consider US to be rapidly approaching complete autocracy (on par with China) so US-hosted AI is a non-starter. And let's not forget local inference keeps getting more efficient, with higher context and TPS in the same amount of RAM. Within a year even small consumer machines will run local models good enough for basic coding, and in 3 years RAM prices will lower and everyone will be able to afford a decent rig.

Finally, open weight models are now good enough for daily work. They may never be as good as SOTA (SOTA will just keep increasing indefinitely), but that doesn't matter; my car may not be as fast as a Porsche but it still gets me to the grocery store and back. So I use non-US hosted model providers which provide open weights, which are both significantly cheaper than Anthropic/OpenAI, and actually allow me to use my subscriptions without a moat.

But yes, Anthropic/OpenAI are absolutely the new Oracle. They will win for US govt and Enterprise contracts. But that's far from the only users of AI.

CMay 17 hours ago|
The US is not xenophobic. That is ridiculous. Any time you say stuff like that, you discredit the things you say that actually make sense. I'm with you on the privacy aspect, but there are multiple dimensions of that which you're ignoring. I'd much prefer taking my chances in the US than in the EU, where they are constantly trying to push companies to weaken privacy.
0xbadcafebee 15 hours ago|||
Europe has way stronger data protection laws than the US. EU has GDPR, strict requirements, large fines. US only has a couple states protecting personal data, with HIPAA for health data, and that's it. We require you to unlock all your devices within 100 miles of a border (inland) so we can look at all your data. Of course our intelligence service also hoovers up the metadata of US citizens in contact with anyone overseas, which is borderline illegal. All our states are now passing "age verification" which is mass surveillance under a different name.

And US absolutely has been xenophobic for years, by official federal policy. I'm really surprised you're not aware of it, but here's a small selection of examples:

- Both our elected and appointed leaders are white nationalists. Our president called all Mexicans murderers and rapists, said African migrants were eating random pets in a rural US town (they weren't, obviously, but it was intended to exacerbate xenophobia)

- Our federal government has a mandate using ICE to try to eject anyone with a Hispanic name from the country (has already deported US citizens based on being hispanic/latino). We even boot people seeing asylum, often exporting them to foreign prisons even if they've never had a criminal record. We have concentration camps now, filled entirely with foreigners, and people who have lived here for decades but were foreigners.

- We stopped accepting new visas from 75 countries. We may even expel you for social media posts we don't like, or for attending a protest that our citizens can attend. We increased travel bans for people from majority Muslim countries. H1-B visas have been rolled back to only the highest paying jobs, and you may need to pay a $15,000 bond. We also now collect and store foreigners' biometric data indefinitely.

- Let's not forget the tariffs on virtually all other nations, to say nothing of "America First" and the new "Greater North America doctrine".

CMay 14 hours ago||
The US accepts immigrants from 200+ countries around the world with the top 5 being Mexico, Cuba, India, Dominican Republic and China. None of that has changed under Trump.

I think you got lost in the rhetoric somewhere.

Tariffs are just the US adjusting to reality which other countries are slow to do. Free trade died all on its own, because the pandemic showed that critical industries were hollowed out by free trade in a way that could be appreciated from a national security perspective. That situation was favoring China too much, so we need to unwind that some.

Tariffs already existed in many countries in practice, so it's not like the US reinvented modern tariffs.

speff 6 hours ago|||
Putting some numbers into the discussion census.gov [0] is tracking a sharp decline in net immigration due to both, a decrease in immigration and an increase in emmigration, from the start of 2025 to the present. Trending towards a net negative.

Pew [1] suggests that the changes around the start of 2025 were due increased restrictions on asylum applications under the previous admin and EOs by the current one to restrict new immigration. Given the rough numbers [2] of about 40k asylum grants per year in the early 2020s, I doubt the previous admin's actions are playing much of a role here.

Stating that none of it (immigration acceptance) changed under this administration might technically be true - with respect to the number of countries applying, but misses this point.

[0]: https://www.census.gov/newsroom/blogs/random-samplings/2026/...

[1]: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2025/08/21/key-findi...

[2]: https://usafacts.org/articles/how-many-people-seek-asylum-in...

0xbadcafebee 8 hours ago|||
Are you seriously trying to reframe the largest tariff war in 100 years, targeting 180 countries and territories, as a readjustment against China? And in both of Trump's terms he's radically changed immigration more than at any time since the 1960's. Either this is a great troll, or you need help, man.
CMay 7 hours ago||
Free trade isn't only a China issue, no. It's only the most important one partly as a function of China propping up massive state companies while also trying to avoid becoming a consumption led economy.

If you feel like formulating a good argument about immigration, I'll listen, but you haven't provided one.

watwut 16 hours ago|||
Europe seems both better capable of sustaining democracy, privacy and rule of law. USA is on verge of being irreversibly done for in all three areas.

It can happen in Europe too, but the full fall is not that close.

CMay 15 hours ago||
Privacy is a concern everywhere, but the center of gravity of the issue moves further up or down the chain depending on the country.

The structure of the US makes it basically the single most secure democracy anywhere right now or in history. No country in Europe or Europe as a whole is even competitive by comparison. The main issue we're facing is that we are by far the primary target for foreign funded activism and systemic attacks, because China and Russia hated NGOs promoting color revolutions.

That is also part of the rule of law issue, but the system is overall managing quite well. It's all moving in slow motion, but many important metrics are going in the right direction, which we need as that's part of deterring China.

lmm 10 hours ago|||
> The structure of the US makes it basically the single most secure democracy anywhere right now or in history. No country in Europe or Europe as a whole is even competitive by comparison.

How do you figure? I hear you have roving gangs of masked thugs beating up random citizens with the backing of your government, that doesn't sound very democratically secure, especially with what healthcare costs over there.

einpoklum 14 hours ago||||
> the single most secure democracy anywhere right now or in history.

So secure, in fact, that it has secured itself even against the influence of its own citizens.

CMay 14 hours ago||
That's not really accurate. The US is structured so that it is self-reinforcing from the bottom up and the top down simultaneously. State laws cannot violate the U.S. constitution and many types of elections cannot be gerrymandered. Even gerrymandered legislatures have limits on what they can do. You can't simply have one party change a state's constitution. Even congress can't be entirely gerrymandered.

Also, we have guns. LOTS of guns. The U.S. military's first and sole responsibility is to the constitution itself. If any state or the federal government tries to get rid of their constitutions, the military can rightfully take it over and re-establish a constitution.

There is no other country that's even remotely close to this secure.

watwut 4 hours ago|||
> The structure of the US makes it basically the single most secure democracy anywhere right now or in history.

This is just not true. It is failing visibly and loudly fast. It used to fail slowly but the process speeded up.

American administration supports Russia now. It praises Russian, Chinese, Belarus leaders again and again. It praises Orban. It hates last bastion of democracy - Europe.

China is not detered. Its power is growing while American one is going down. Trump openly admires its leader. China is celebrating current state of America.

More comments...