Hacker News Reader

Comment by chanakya | Hacker News Reader

How would that slow down the Chinese models, given that the US has no regulatory reach in China?

You target the US companies: if they can't use these Chinese models, then they're less of a danger for a now captive audience in the US (and the West generally).

This is already kind of the case: the big enterprises don't really want to touch the latest Chinese models. It's a real pain, personally, I want to use them at work!

1. China is a bigger market than the US for Ai, they are on pace to process 100Q tokens this year, roughly the same or more than the US big companies

2. Enterprise trends are towards open weights, several routers and vendors now have more than half the volume going towards open weights

Yes, but thats not something a company engaged in regulatory capture for themselves care about: especially if they're worried they'll be outpaced and overtaken by the Chinese labs. Which they will be, IMO.

they care because they know it unlikely open weights will be banned, and thus available to American companies, with regulatory capture (onerous requirements) being a "good enough" "ban" that their big models don't face real competition, regardless of the open weight origin. American companies make open weights too, they are equally threatening to Big Ai financials.

That will then create incentives for companies that consume AI tokens to counter lobby against those regulations.

Incentives exist, they are already lobbying and making counter public statement, like Jensen Huang of Nvidia.

His first tweet ever, from this last July

https://images.nvidia.com/pdf/Open-Weights-and-American-AI-L...

Show them you can burn tokens in seven sessions day and night with comparable results to Opus with less energy and less than 10 dollars a day, per dev.

We have. Unfortunately there are political realities that get in the way, and Bedrock for example doesn't have GLM 5.3 (Flash or otherwise) or anything new/useful

I do imagine it'll change, but it hasn't yet.

If it's hosted, all they know is "data goes to China".

Until profitable, reputable third parties host open models in the US with ZDR or they become plug-and-play for self-hosting at a modest cost, paying the US models is as much about data protection and liability as performance.

Because the end goal is to ban non-US AI companies from being able to do business in the US.

...because everyone saw how well that worked for the Jones act, what with all the naval yards the US has lost over time, and how nearly no US-built ships operate where not legally mandated /s

Just because it's a bad idea, doesn't mean they won't do it.

some US companies benefit from that act for sure.

it wouldn't slow down China as much as make it impossible for American companies to use non-American options, they care about their margins and don't want to be commoditized

The US is meeting with China to discuss the threat of AI… May be fine but, i’m wary

Trump and Xi are meeting. Not the countries, just two corrupt and malevolent individuals.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com