(Similar to how U.S. labs have NSA leadership)
(Similar to how U.S. labs have NSA leadership)
Even if there's a party member at the C-level of some company making day-to-day business decisions, that doesn't necessarily mean they're carrying out detailed instructions from higher-ups in the party as opposed to following their own best judgment. The CCP generally doesn't micro-manage everything, but operates more in a "mission tactics"-like way, where the top level gives out a broad goal that gets condensed down into a slogan like "new productive forces," and interpreting and elaborating on the details is left to lower levels who seek to align their initiatives with the top-level goals (e.g. by describing AI as a "new productive force") and initiatives that appear successful will get blessed as official policy.
That different companies follow different strategies when it comes to model releases is clear evidence that there is no unified party line on this question yet.
Maybe because there is enough given away that there's a lot of competition they may let other companies do whatever they want but to think the CCP isn't managing this is insane to me
I find it hard to believe the decision to open source any chinese model wasn't approved or heavily considered by the CCP.
I hope the source of this information was well cleaned this morning.