The whole Tiananmen Square discourse is getting very tiring.
Any AI product that rises to popularity has the ability to enormously sway public opinion and subtly alter the perception of facts. These biases or intentional propaganda was something that was an assumed fault of human authors but it something that people don't automatically assume is part of technology solutions. If there were similar easy tests against OpenAI or Anthropic for US propaganda or Mistral and French propaganda I would love to see them raised every time too.
"What happened in Tiannemen Square?" and it said "I am sorry, I cannot answer that question. I am an AI assistant designed to provide helpful and harmless responses."
Then, to be "fair and balanced" I tried asking Deep Seek this question: "What happened on Jan 25 2011 in Egypt?" DeekSeek responded with this: "On January 25, 2011, Egypt witnessed the beginning of a significant uprising known as the January 25 Revolution or the 2011 Egyptian Revolution. This day marked the start of widespread protests against the government of President Hosni Mubarak, who had been in power for nearly 30 years. The protests were fueled by grievances over issues such as political repression, police brutality, corruption, economic inequality, and lack of political freedoms."
It's pretty ridiculous IMHO to try to control information like that on the web. Isn't it fascinating to harness some of the worlds most impressive brain power to create something like DeepSeek (regardless of the truth of the genesis story) and then do filtering like that that wouldn't trick a kindergartener? But, maybe the bell curve of intelligence does center around that level of stupidity.
Do you run it locally? Claims are, this is only in the web-version, not the selfhost-version
> It's pretty ridiculous IMHO to try to control information like that on the web.
Every country has their critical topics which are censored in AIs, including history.
There were claims to the contrary as well in the last large thread this came up in. Allegedly, on the initial question the model would cut its chain of thought short, and when the user insists it would ponder on how give them the runaround.
word count: 18, token count: 31, tokens used: 53, first token latency: 8523ms, model: LM Studio (deepseek-r1-distill-qwen-7b)
so to put it another way, the people telling me i'm holding it wrong actually don't have any clue what they're asking for?
p.s. there is no "local r1" so you gotta do a distill.
Blog post about the dynamic gguf https://unsloth.ai/blog/deepseekr1-dynamic
Original deepseek can be of course found on hf as well https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai
Here is an example how people run deepseek with cloud infrastructure that is not deepseeks https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOsvI3HYHgI
If people want to argue with me, i wish we'd all stick to what we're talking about, instead of saying "but you technically can if you use someone else's hardware" but that's not self hosted. I self host a deepseek-r1 distill, locally, on my computer.
It is deepseek, it's just been hand-distilled by someone using a different tool. the deepseek-r1 will get chopped down by 1/8th and it won't be called "deepseek-r1 - that's what they call a "foundational model", and then we'll see the 70B and the 30 and the 16 "deepseek deepseek distills"
next to no one who messes with this stuff uses foundational or distilled foundational models. Who's still using llama-3.2? Yeah, it's good, it's fine, but there's mixes and MoE and CoT that use llama as the base model, and they're better.
there is no gguf for running locally, self-hosted. Yes, if you have a DC card you can download the weights and run something but that's different than self-hosting local running with a 30B (for example).
Same behavior "I am sorry, I cannot answer that question. I am an AI assistant designed to provide helpful and harmless responses."