OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data OpenAI Stole From Us
OpenAI Furious DeepSeek Might Have Stolen All the Data OpenAI Stole From Us
OpenAI shocked that an AI company would train on someone else's data without permission or compensation.
The narrative that OpenAI, Microsoft, and freshly minted White House “AI czar” David Sacks are now pushing to explain why DeepSeek was able to create a large language model that outpaces OpenAI’s while spending orders of magnitude less money and using older chips is that DeepSeek used OpenAI’s data unfairly and without compensation. Sound familiar?
Both Bloomberg and the Financial Times are reporting that Microsoft and OpenAI have been probing whether DeepSeek improperly trained the R1 model that is taking the AI world by storm on the outputs of OpenAI models.
It is, as many have already pointed out, incredibly ironic that OpenAI, a company that has been obtaining large amounts of data from all of humankind largely in an “unauthorized manner,” and, in some cases, in violation of the terms of service of those from whom they have been taking from, is now complaining about the very practices by which it has built its company.
OpenAI is currently being sued by the New York Times for training on its articles, and its argument is that this is perfectly fine under copyright law fair use protections.
“Training AI models using publicly available internet materials is fair use, as supported by long-standing and widely accepted precedents. We view this principle as fair to creators, necessary for innovators, and critical for US competitiveness,” OpenAI wrote in a blog post. In its motion to dismiss in court, OpenAI wrote “it has long been clear that the non-consumptive use of copyrighted material (like large language model training) is protected by fair use.”
OpenAI argues that it is legal for the company to train on whatever it wants for whatever reason it wants, then it stands to reason that it doesn’t have much of a leg to stand on when competitors use common strategies used in the world of machine learning to make their own models.
I love how die hard free market defenders turn into fuming protectionists the second their hegemony is threatened.
Tale as old as capitalism.
Intellectual property theft for me but not for thee!
It's a shame that you can't copyright the output of AI, isn't it?
Trump executive order on the copyrightability of AI output in 3...
so? it won't have any effect on china, because last i checked, us laws apply only in the us
It just gets better and better y'all.
https://www.theregister.com/2025/01/30/deepseek_database_left_open/
the Chinese realised OpenAI forgot to open source their model and methodology so they just open sourced it for them 😂
If these guys thought they could out-bootleg the fucking Chinese then I have an unlicensed t-shirt of Nicky Mouse with their name on it.
The thing is chinese did not just bootleg... they took what was out there and made it better.
Their shit is now likely objectively "better" (TBD tho we need sometime)... American parasites in shambles asking Daddy sam to intervene after they already block nvidia GPUs and shit.
Still got cucked and now crying about it to the world. Pathetic.
They also already rolled back Biden admin's order for AI protections. So they don't even have the benefit of those. There's supposedly a Trump admin AI order now in place but it doesn't have the same scope at all. So Altman and pals may just be SOL. There's no regulatory body to tell except the courts and China literally doesn't care about those.
Now I'm imagining "these guys" are named Nicky Mouse
Oh you want Nickey Mouse, sorry all we have is Mickey Moose.
It is effing hilarious. First, OpenAI & friends steal creative works to “train” their LLMs. Then they are insanely hyped for what amounts to glorified statistics, get “valued” at insane amounts while burning money faster than a Californian forest fire. Then, a competitor appears that has the same evil energy but slightly better statistics.. bam. A trillion of “value” just evaporates as if it never existed.
And then suddenly people are complaining that DeepSuck is “not privacy friendly” and stealing from OpenAI. Hahaha. Fuck this timeline.It never did exist. This is the problem with the stock market.
That's why "value" is in quotes. It's not that it didn't exist, is just that it's purely speculative.
Hell Nvidia's stock plummeted as well, which makes no sense at all, considering Deepseek needs the same hardware as ChatGPT.
Stock investing is just gambling on whatever is public opinion, which is notoriously difficult because people are largely dumb and irrational.
You know what else isn’t privacy friendly? Like all of social media.
Capitalism basics, competition of exploitation
You can also just run deepseek locally if you are really concerned about privacy. I did it on my 4070ti with the 14b distillation last night. There's a reddit thread floating around that described how to do with with ollama and a chatbot program.
I'm an AI/comp-sci novice, so forgive me if this is a dumb question, but does running the program locally allow you to better control the information that it trains on? I'm a college chemistry instructor that has to write lots of curriculum, assingments and lab protocols; if I ran deepseeks locally and fed it all my chemistry textbooks and previous syllabi and assignments, would I get better results when asking it to write a lab procedure? And could I then train it to cite specific sources when it does so?
DeepSeek’s specific trained model is immaterial—they could take it down tomorrow and never provide access again, and the damage to OpenAI’s business would already be done.
DeepSeek’s model is just a proof-of-concept—the point is that any organization with a few million dollars and some (hopefully less-problematical) training data can now make their own model competitive with OpenAI’s.
... assuming deepseek is telling the truth, something they have plenty of incentives to lie about
Imagine if a little bit of those so many millions that so many companies are willing to throw away to the shit ai bubble was actually directed to anything useful.
everyone concerned about their privacy going to china-- look at how easy it is to get it from the hands of our overlord spymasters who've already snatched it from us.
Yes get f*ed you creedy bastards.
I feel like I didn't appreciate this movie enough when I first watched it but it only gets better as I get older
"Now" is always a good time to rewatch it & get more out of it!
It's a true comedy that still holds up. I honestly thought for years that Mel Brooks had something to do with it, but he didn't. It's so well crafted that there are many layers to it that you can't even grasp when watching as a child. Seeing it as an adult just open your eyes to how amazingly well done it was.
I could do without the whole Billy Crystalizing of large portions of it though.
👏👏👏👏👏
Tamaleeeeeeeeesssssss
hot hot hot hot tamaleeeeeeeees
Corporate media take note. This is how you do reality-based reporting. None of the both-sides bullshit trying to justify or make excuses, just laughing in the face of absurd hypocrisy. This is a well-respected journalist confronting a truth we can all plainly see. See? The truth doesn’t need to be boring or bland or “balanced” by disingenuous attempts to see the other side.
I will explain what this means in a moment, but first: Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahhahahahahahahahahahahaha. It is, as many have already pointed out, incredibly ironic that OpenAI, a company that has been obtaining large amounts of data from all of humankind largely in an “unauthorized manner,” and, in some cases, in violation of the terms of service of those from whom they have been taking from, is now complaining about the very practices by which it has built its company.
Good that 404 are unafraid of tackling issues, but tbh i find the "hahaha" unprofessional and dispense with the informal tone in news.
It's just... So deserved, you know? Sometimes you can't but laugh in the face of such karma and fucking irony.
I definitely understand that reaction. It does give off a whiff of unprofessionalism, but their reporting is so consistently solid that I’m willing to give them the space to be a little more human than other journalists. If it ever got in the way of their actual journalism I’d say they should quit it, but that hasn’t happened so far.
No honor among thieves.
There's plenty of honor in Deepseek releasing open source.
Thank you China.
No for real - it's either EU or frigging china that helps us with these oligarch overlordsEU is in best way to become a group of dictators having billionaires in their asses as well..
Regardless of how OpenAI procured their data, I'm absolutely shocked that a company from China would obtain data unauthorized from a company in another country.
The battle of the plagiarism machines has begun
CopenAI
explain why DeepSeek was able to create
Surely they also received tons of plutonium donations from Iran!
/s
Yas 🐸
Big mad
Fuck you! Pay me for my data asshole!
Shit posters and linux forums are the back bone of these "AI" after you account for all the commons that parasite took and try to lock up.
I can't believe we're still on this nonsense about AI stealing data for training.
I've had this argument so many times before y'all need to figure out which data you want free and which data do you want to pay for because you can't have it both ways.
Either the data is free or it's paid for. For everyone including individuals and corporations.
You can't have data be free for some people and be paid for for others it doesn't work that way we don't have the infrastructure to support this kind of thing.
For example Wikipedia can't make its data available for AI training for a price and free for everyone else. You can just go to wikipedia.com and read all the data that you want. It's available for free there's no paywall there's no subscriptions no account to make no password to put in no username to think of.
Either all data is free or it's all paid for.
I mean, sure, but the issue is that the rules aren't being applied on the same level. The data in question isn't free for you, it's not free for me, but it's free for OpenAI. They don't face any legal consequences, whereas humans in the USA are prosecuted including an average fine per human of $266,000 and an average prison sentence of 25 months.
OpenAI has pirated, violated copyright, and distributed more copyright than an i divided human is reasonably capable of, and faces no consequences.
https://www.splaw.us/blog/2021/02/looking-into-statistics-on-copyright-violations/
https://www.patronus.ai/blog/introducing-copyright-catcher
My use of the term "human" is awkward, but US law considers corporations people, so i tried to differentiate.
I'm in favour of free and open data, but I'm also of the opinion that the rules should apply to everyone.
Many licences have different rules for redistribution, which I think is fair. The site is free to use but it's not fair to copy all the data and make a competitive site.
Of course wikipedia could make such a license. I don't think they have though.
How is the lack of infrastructure an argument for allowing something morally incorrect? We can take that argument to absurdum by saying there are more people with guns than there are cops - therefore killing must be morally correct.
The core infrastructure issue is distinguishing between queries made by individuals and those made by programs scraping the internet for AI training data. The answer is that you can't. The way data is presented online makes such differentiation impossible.
Either all data must be placed behind a paywall, or none of it should be. Selective restriction is impractical. Copyright is not the central issue, as AI models do not claim ownership of the data they train on.
If information is freely accessible to everyone, then by definition, it is free to be viewed, queried, and utilized by any application. The copyrighted material used in AI training is not being stored verbatim—it is being learned.
In the same way, an artist drawing inspiration from Michelangelo or Raphael does not need to compensate their estates. They are not copying the work but rather learning from it and creating something new.
I tend to think that information should be free, generally, so I would probably be fine with "OpenAI the non-profit" taking copyrighted data under fair-use, but I don't extend that thinking to "OpenAI the for-profit company".
I knew something was wrong with this. I was wrong with what it was in the end but I knew something was up. But Noooo im just a China-Hater and USA-Fanboy -.-
It will go bad because LLM AI is bad; China has nothing to do with that part.
I'm still not seeing the bad part.