It’s because people the meme states that DeepSeek didn’t accomplish anything novel. That the real innovation was done in America with ChatGPT. And there is a narrative that the Chinese are not original, but only really good at copying other people’s work often using inferior parts. That last part, while not explicit in the meme, is in the culture.
My understanding is that what DeepSeek did was novel for the training data it used l. However, there are some experts who question the ability to train the model using the limited budget they claimed and their understanding of the field would require far more processing power. I think there’s a non-racist and racist way of interpreting and answering this question.
Edit: it’s also important that this is a shit post.
It’s because people the meme states that DeepSeek didn’t accomplish anything novel. That the real innovation was done in America with ChatGPT.
You literally said claimed that as what was racist about it…
Again, companies being accused of copying isn’t racist. You made it racist by injecting the countries they were developed in and bringing in stereotypes.
Yes. Those are the first two sentences of the paragraph. But the idea is contained in the paragraph which describes the process from those two sentences to racist idea.
I think your other claim is better, that I was digging. But I think in today’s environment racism is rarely explicitly. It is implicit and easily denied. It can also be unintended. And I think those claiming it’s racism can be wrong. And even in failing, can legitimately point to something in the culture that conditions the interpretation of statements like this.
What was more important was describing the process.
It wasn’t just the first few lines, it was the direct answer to the question though, that was my sticking point.
I get how racism can be deep under the surface, like a sort of “shadow racism” but I think assuming there’s racism at play can be damaging as well. I get where you’re coming from, I guess I just don’t agree with the arrived at point.
I should have prefaced my answer and stated that I don’t think this is racist, even unintentionally. But removing that possibility in this situation is a mistake, which I think I explain why below.
I think it falsely reduces and misrepresent Deepseek’s innovation. And that fucking sucks. And in the atmosphere of “Chinese knockoffs” when a legitimate and well publicized innovation comes from China is misrepresented and downplayed and where it would be more appropriate to cautiously praise it, it’s obviously ignorance by the meme creator. And then you have to wonder if it’s racist ignorance or not. Frankly, well never know. But excising it from the possibilities is, in my opinion, a mistake.
Any case, this is far too serious of a conversation in shitpost and I take full responsibility.
It’s because people the meme states that DeepSeek didn’t accomplish anything novel. That the real innovation was done in America with ChatGPT. And there is a narrative that the Chinese are not original, but only really good at copying other people’s work often using inferior parts. That last part, while not explicit in the meme, is in the culture.
My understanding is that what DeepSeek did was novel for the training data it used l. However, there are some experts who question the ability to train the model using the limited budget they claimed and their understanding of the field would require far more processing power. I think there’s a non-racist and racist way of interpreting and answering this question.
Edit: it’s also important that this is a shit post.
You can decide if this post is racist or not. https://lemmy.ml/post/25316007
Saying company A copied company B isn’t racist. Those clsims are made all the time. This is really digging to make it racist.
That’s not the part that I was claiming was racist.
You said
You literally said claimed that as what was racist about it…
Again, companies being accused of copying isn’t racist. You made it racist by injecting the countries they were developed in and bringing in stereotypes.
Yes. Those are the first two sentences of the paragraph. But the idea is contained in the paragraph which describes the process from those two sentences to racist idea.
I think your other claim is better, that I was digging. But I think in today’s environment racism is rarely explicitly. It is implicit and easily denied. It can also be unintended. And I think those claiming it’s racism can be wrong. And even in failing, can legitimately point to something in the culture that conditions the interpretation of statements like this.
What was more important was describing the process.
It wasn’t just the first few lines, it was the direct answer to the question though, that was my sticking point.
I get how racism can be deep under the surface, like a sort of “shadow racism” but I think assuming there’s racism at play can be damaging as well. I get where you’re coming from, I guess I just don’t agree with the arrived at point.
I should have prefaced my answer and stated that I don’t think this is racist, even unintentionally. But removing that possibility in this situation is a mistake, which I think I explain why below.
I think it falsely reduces and misrepresent Deepseek’s innovation. And that fucking sucks. And in the atmosphere of “Chinese knockoffs” when a legitimate and well publicized innovation comes from China is misrepresented and downplayed and where it would be more appropriate to cautiously praise it, it’s obviously ignorance by the meme creator. And then you have to wonder if it’s racist ignorance or not. Frankly, well never know. But excising it from the possibilities is, in my opinion, a mistake.
Any case, this is far too serious of a conversation in shitpost and I take full responsibility.