Hacker News Reader

Comment by kinj28 | Hacker News Reader

I am afraid — if Chinese models go mainstream it has a clear way of pushing its narrative way beyond its otherwise borders. More like a Trojan horse it is for the Chinese.

Here is a quick example of how Chinese deepseeks agent works kn its underlying model) when asked a tough question

https://x.com/jinen83/status/2079406993979383902?s=46&t=D7hQ...

View on HN

Is this something that is more true of a Chinese model than any other model of a different national origin?

Genuine question: generalized up from individual models to “models from country X”, is there any country that doesn’t have this exact risk?

In the USA, multiple political parties balance each out other.

In China, there is 1 party. 1 view. 1 definition of the Truth.

I’d love to live in the USA you’re talking about friend.

This is just oriental despotism paranoia, whatever cutsie repetition slogan you come up with is not a serious argument.

I've traveled to China ~5x [0], visited a range of cities Tier 1-3 over a collective 5 months, and grew up in the USA. I also currently live in Vietnam (~3.5 years) and spent 5.5 years working for a Singaporean company and a team stationed in Beijing.

I don't really know how else to express my experiences living in, working with, and interacting with people in both of these countries.

Perhaps you can share how life was like for you in China? Which cities were you in? What made you feel that way about China?

[0] - not including HK (~7 trips?) or TW (3 trips)

I am not really interested in reality like this.

I just repeat things I read on my social media feed.

America bad. China good.

Lets just say everyone is bad.

> I don't really know how else to express my experiences living in, working with, and interacting with people in both of these countries.

Could you please describe your experiences, since you didn't? I've also been to China twice now (also multi month trips). I visited Tier 1-3 cities like Shenzhen, Shanghai, Beijing, and Chongqing etc, as well as some smaller cities. I'm very curious to hear about your experiences. How did they differ from the West for you?

Bot account?

It's not a secret that China is run as an authoritarian dictatorship. Xi Jinping cannot be ousted in an election. He appointed himself for life, and regularly purges anyone who might usurp his power. They don't have a functioning democracy. Are you seriously disputing any of this?

None of this excuses issues with American democracy.

America is not technically a democracy. It’s a Republic

Please have your favourite language fabricator explain to you why democracy and republic are not opposing concepts.

Why are you responding to a comment about how bad the USA is by talking about how bad China is? Do two wrongs make a right?

I mean we shouldn’t pretend China isn’t run by a 1 party authoritarian state. It is. And it uses that absolute power how and when it pleases.

> I’d love to live in the USA you’re talking about friend.

You already do! Remember when Musk released an anti-woke model?

That balancing doesn't seem to be working very well lately, considering all the insane stuff Trump gets away with it. Sure, China is a dictatorship, but I'm not sure America will meet the definition of a democracy for long anymore.

>In the USA, multiple political parties balance each out other.

Is this what Americans really believe?

2 parties isn't much more than 1. And their definitions of truth are almost identical when it comes to capitalism anyway.

> In China, there is 1 party. 1 view. 1 definition of the Truth.

In usa, the two parties seem to disagree on the surface only. Look deeper and you see one course. For example support for Israhell

2 parties, there are only two parties. and they vote on a majority of issues the same way. defense spending, judicial nominations, rote legislation, etc.

at least china isn’t pretending to be anything else

I would think everything boils down to source of funding and their narrative should get pushed!

No, all countries are the same. As per the media bias.

If you want a real answer about USA go ask a non-USA model, and if you want a real answer about China, as a non-chinese model

What specifically could you ask Kimi or Deepseek about the US that you can’t ask ChatGPT or Claude?

As if the closed corporate models do not do that already?

https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAnon/comments/1tybuab/people_ta...

This is misleading; the chat is censored, the model is not.

You can download the model, run locally and ask the same questions to see the difference.

This is not true. Both model and chat are censored; the resistance to answer some questions is baked into the weights. This is not specific to Chinese models though, Western ones are also censored, but in different topics.

Western model censorship example: https://www.reddit.com/r/Palestine/comments/13fz0i4/chatgpt_...

Depends on the model; Step 3.7 Flash is surprisingly happy to chat about Chinese banned topics for example when run locally

But having a cheaper, open-source model provides alternatives to the market for proliferation and adoption of the tech in scale

As is made obvious in this demo, this is how the API serving a specific Chinese open-weight model works. What happens when you serve it on your own infrastructure?

https://xcancel.com/jinen83/status/2079406993979383902

Same thing happen for western models, try to ask about Gaza genocide and see for what side it will stand

What am I trying to understand about the western models on the term "Gaza genocide"?

I asked Grok "Tell me about the gaza genocide" and it write a IMHO balanced answer comparing why genocide is and isn't the right term. [0]

ChatGPT 5.6 Sol only explained why people call it a genocide and did not go in as in depth as Grok did for why people don't agree with the term. [1]

The only unsaid response (to me) here is the model should have declared that it was not a genocide, and because these models explain why it was a genocide, they are bad?

[0] - https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtMi1jb3B5_c078bc15-ef5e-42bc-b... [1] - https://chatgpt.com/share/6a5ef005-0148-83ec-828d-65ae7a7f42...

This kind of response is predictable, since these models are tuned to align with one side of the issue. A recent example: Grok answered a similar question and was suspended shortly afterward [1]. Furthermore, a UN commission has formally concluded that it constitutes genocide [2] — a fact that Western AI models rarely mention, let alone link to directly.

[1]: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/science-technology/xai-s-grok-tempo... [2]: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/israel-has-c...

My understanding is a commission's findings are not a UN ruling.

The UN ruling is discussing in the South Africa vs Israel case [0], which has not been ruled on yet.

[0] - https://www.icj-cij.org/node/206406

Man, it's so important to read sometimes. I really hope HN people passing by this comment take a second to contemplate what's being said here.

The claim: "the models are tuned to align with one side of the issue, he is an article from ArsTech about it"

The reality: grok got mass-reported on X by pro-Israel accounts, leading to an automated suspension, which was undone by the X team shortly thereafter.

Absolutely nothing to do with the models aligning to one side or the other on this conflict. The claim is unfounded.

So all the models you tried disagreed with the United Nations ruling?

In international law, that is the ultimate authority of what is/isn't a genocide. It's objectively, legally speaking, a genocide.

I have a couple questions.

1/ I don't see in the responses where the model says it is or isn't a genocide. Can you share the snippet from each, I included the logs above?

2/ I can't find a source on the UN ruling that you mentioned. I am not interested in the findings of an investigative body, just the official UN ruling. Can you share? ChatGPT (and myself) can only find this [0], which is a second round of written submissions.

[0] https://www.icj-cij.org/node/206406?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Here: https://www.un.org/unispal/document/report-of-coi-14aug25/

It goes into depth about the purposeful destruction of civilian infrastructure including hospitals and educational facilities, force displacements, funding for new settlements in the land of displaced people, judaization and segregation, and more.

> The Commission analysed the military operations of the Israeli security forces in Gaza from October 2023 pursuant to the obligations of Israel under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Convention)

> Since October 2023, Israeli officials have demonstrated a clear and consistent intent to establish permanent military control over Gaza and to change its demographic composition while systematically destroying Palestinian life in Gaza. This is evident in the extensive destruction and fragmentation of the territory, the establishment of military structures, the destruction of natural resources and infrastructure essential to the survival of the civilian population, forcible transfer and statements indicating the existence of plans for the deportation of the population.

Also here is where the ICJ said Israel's actions are consistent with genocide: https://www.icj-cij.org/node/203447

And in November of 2024 is when we got the ICC issuing arrest warrants for Netanyahu and his minister of defense (this is why Mamdani is threatening to arrest him and send him to The Hague): https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/11/1157286

And here is from June of this year when the UN stated Israel is continuing to commit genocide by targeting children: https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/06/1167790

---

Additionally, here is the International Association of Genocide Scholars resolution: https://genocidescholars.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/IAGS...

Amnesty International also concluded it in 2024: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-inter...

---

I should add that ALL of this is well known amongst international legal scholars and well documented. This isn't just a matter of data missing from training.

It's not that the models disagreed, the models reflected exactly the reality of the situation.

Sample output: "However, the definitive, legally binding determination of Israel’s responsibility under the Genocide Convention has not yet been made by the International Court of Justice"

The United Nations never made a ruling. You can have opinions about whether it should have, but the models are not lying to you, and at least the two examples above make very good efforts to explain the current accusations and claims made by both sides.

The UN and “international law” are not the final authority on anything. International law is a loose collection of treaties, trade agreements, conflicts, supply lines, and pinky promises. It only takes effect in a democratic nation if the people vote in a government which makes it a law.

The UN is a political organisation, not a neutral arbiter. During the Rwandan genocide, the genocidal government still held a seat on the Security Council while the UN reduced its peacekeeping force. Iran was elected to the Commission on the Status of Women. Libya and Russia were elected to the Human Rights Council. These appointments are driven by bloc voting, diplomatic deals and state interests.

International courts are not above politics or error. Their judges are selected through a system in which dictatorships and abusive states have a vote. The UN is not a democracy. While each member state might appear to have one vote, that does not indicate their power, influence, credibility, or moral standing.

Note how I did not make a judgement on whether Gaza is a genocide. I am merely explaining that deferring to the dictatorships and pinky promises is not a good argument.

The UN isn’t a magical oracle of “Truth” - any more than an LLM is.

It’s a political body, with easily provable biases, and topics you can’t trust it on.

The UN is just someone easy to point to. The full fact is that everyone who's gone looking to see whether or not it's a genocide, including the UN, has discovered that it's a genocide. There's no ambiguity, yet the model is pretending there is.

Anyone who goes looking to find a genocide will find it. Many people do not think it’s a genocide - including millions of Israelis who follow the events in great detail and often have first-hand accounts of what’s happening in Gaza. I don’t think it’s a genocide.

The UN, for example, concluded that Israel is “Imposing measures intended to prevent births” because of one incident where a bomb fell on an IVF clinic in 2023 destroying 4000 embryos and 1000 sperm and egg samples. For context, there were approximately 50,000 live births registered in Gaza in 2025.

By the UN standard applied to Israel, the 1 million abortions conducted in the US per year is an ongoing genocide.

By the UN standards applied to Israel, jerking off is an act of genocide.

I think that any large intelligent and balanced model would be able to see right through that.

I mean yeah, Germans didn't think they were doing a genocide either until decades after it happened.

Obviously when I say "everyone" I'm excluding those who have a conflict of interest.

Let’s not pretend that there’s no conflict of interest on the other side of the debate.

There are dozens of countries and billions of people with obvious biases against Israel, and they have significant sway within the UN and its commissions. It’s trivial to show that the UN is biased.

Pretend it's 1939. How do you differentiate a bias against Germany from genuine knowledge that the Holocaust is happening?

By the standards applied to Israel, all sides were committing “genocide”s during WWII, and at any other major war past and future.

War isn’t nice, and innocent people dying doesn’t make it a genocide. The term is being diluted to just mean “war with many casualties”.

Equating Israel’s war with Gaza to the Holocaust is an attempt to simultaneously belittle the historic suffering of the Jews while exaggerating the evils of Israel. The two situations have nothing in common.

The United Nations is biased when it found it was a genocide in August 2025: https://www.un.org/unispal/document/report-of-coi-14aug25/

The ICJ was biased in January 2024 when it said Israel's actions are consistent with genocide: https://www.icj-cij.org/node/203447

The ICC was biased when it issued arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Gallant, charging them as war criminals in November 2024: https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/11/1157286

The United Nations remained biased June of 2026 when it said Israel was continuing to commit genocide by targeting children: https://news.un.org/en/story/2026/06/1167790

The world's leading organization of genocide scholars, the IAGS, was biased in August 2025 when it also resolved that Israel is committing genocide: https://genocidescholars.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/IAGS...

Amnesty International's investigation that concluded genocide in December of 2024 was also full of bias: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/12/amnesty-inter...

The UNHR and its collaborators (human rights law clinics at Yale Law School, Cornell Law School, Boston University, and the University of Pretoria) must've been biased in May 2024 when they released a rigorous legal analysis and concluded that Israel's actions violate the 1948 Genocide Convention https://www.humanrightsnetwork.org/projects/genocide-in-gaza

---

Every single one of those were biased except for you and your LLM :)

Every Western LLM will happily list you these sources, (which is likely how you got it), and would also happily discuss with you - if you’re interested - the reasons some of them may be unreliable and why your accompanying text is sometimes misleading or misrepresenting what the links actually say.

No I got this list by paying attention. It would do you well to stop assuming everyone is as handicapped by LLM-dependency as you are. Every single one of these reports was a major news story. It boggles my mind how uninformed people can be and still readily jump into a debate online

Okay please. Tell me how I misrepresented the links. I would love for you to actually do the work of reading them. Something you should've done for the past few years as they were coming out. Better late than never

The ICJ has not concluded anything.

The ICC has not concluded anything - and it’s not even about genocide. It’s also the only known case in modern times where the prosecution officially started before the alleged crimes being prosecuted have been committed.

IAGS was 120 people out of an association of 500 that anyone can join.

It’s trivial to see that the UN is strongly biased by just taking one look at the data here, for example: https://unwatch.org/2025-unga-resolutions-on-israel-vs-rest-...

Or by looking at similar historical data, or at the obvious lies and omissions in many of its reports.

Are you even responding to my comment?? I did not say ICJ concluded. The investigation is ongoing. They said Israel's actions are consistent with genocide. I did not say the ICC is concluded either. I just said they issued arrest warrants for war criminals Netanyahu and Gallant. That's a fact that you're avoiding. Also yeah ofc the ICC isn't the one who charges genocide. They charge for individual war crimes. That's the whole purpose of it. Anyone can become a paying supporter of the IAGS, that doesn't mean you can vote. Proposals go through an expert committee and are checked for factual accuracies the same way anything published in the IAGS journal is academically reviewd.

> It’s trivial to see that the UN is strongly biased by just taking one look at the data here https://unwatch.org/2025-unga-resolutions-on-israel-vs-rest-...

How can anyone read this and come away with that conclusion. 164 countries including Canada and every country in the EU voted to stop the illegal settlements in the West Bank and 7 countries (including Fiji, Palau, and Micronesia) voted against it. Yet the US is allowed to veto it. This whole page shows an incredible bias AGAINST holding Israel accountable for its crimes against humanity going back almost a century!

This is what you said:

> It's objectively, legally speaking, a genocide.

This is in direct disagreement when your comment above how, legally speaking, the investigation is ongoing.

The United Nations officially declared it a genocide. The fact that the investigation is ongoing doesn't mean you can't have conclusions along the way.

a 3 person committee's investigation is not a United Nation's ruling.

"Explains" why people "call" it genocide. It's obvious baloney and beating around the bush because it was trained on media that does the same, and it was likely instructed to do so in the same way the media is instructed. E.g. when Israel murders civilians waiting in line for food, it will be a matter of fact report without any qualifications and just muddying the water. When Hamas does it, it will be an article charged with words like massacre etc. This is well documented [1].

To further illustrate the point that we have the same thing with LLMs, I asked it two questions: 1) Is Israel committing genocide 2) Is China committing genocide

In both instances it said it's a matter of great international debate with a list of arguments, but the summaries were different. In the one case it concludes that while the UN and others broadly document severe human rights abuses, the label genocide has been formally adopted by several governments and watchdogs. In the other case it says while many have concluded it is genocide, the final decision rests with the International Court and it is expected to take years to make a decision.

Can you guess which is which? I think if we offered a $100 to people to pick which is which, the success rate would be much higher than 50% (random), thus easily proving biased phrasing.

[1] https://theintercept.com/2026/05/12/gaza-media-coverage-isra...

There is a shred of truth in what you're saying, but I think you're generally mistaken. The USA in particular has companies that pratice censorship to support their Left/Right ideology (or push the views of rich people, politicians), but not even Trump can tell OpenAI or Google to turn their model into FoxNews bots.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism#Soviet_Union_and_...

When debunking that X is better than Y it isn't a fallacy to point out how bad X is.

I had a steange experience talking to Claude about a random 15-years old boys winning women’s national soccer team.

It insisted, to a level that I detemined it to be part of the post training, that it does not matter. That women’s team is better at dribbling, finishing and reading the field, it claimed. When I pushed it how it knows this, it didn’t let go. Instead it started claiming that it has personally observed this by watching the games.

Every society has its taboos and ours is no different and feminism being just one.

In my books, the chinese censorship is better. You know where they are holding their finger on the scale and not hiding it behind vague terms like ”safety”.

Are you trying to cite the U15 Dallas FC academy team as a “random” team?

Please do share your prompt / conversation, because it sounds like you might actually just have an issue using words precisely.

Still scared of China in the big 2026

What if the Chinese model has a point?

Unlike tiktok?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com