cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/25011462

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Decoupling America’s Artificial Intelligence Capabilities from China Act of 2025’’.

SEC. 3. PROHIBITIONS ON IMPORT AND EXPORT OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE OR GENERATIVE ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE TECHNOLOGY OR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY

(a) PROHIBITION ON IMPORTATION.—On and after the date that is 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the importation into the United States of artificial intelligence or generative artificial intelligence technology or intellectual property developed or produced in the People’s Republic of China is prohibited.

Currently, China has the best open source models in text, video and music generation.

  • Gamers_mate@beehaw.org
    0·
    29 days ago

    I could understand banning closed source models but open sourced models that work better than anything propriety isn’t that just the free market that corporations like to pretend to be part of?

        • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
          0·
          29 days ago

          None of the code and training data is available. Its just the usual Huggingface thing, where some weights and parameters are available, nothing else. People repeat DeepSeek (and many other) Ai LLM models being open source, but they aren’t.

          They even have a Github source code repository at https://github.com/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-R1 , but its only an image and PDF file and links to download the model on Huggingface (plus optional weights and parameter files, to fine tune it). There is no source code, and no training data available. Also here is an interesting article talking about this issue: Liesenfeld, Andreas, and Mark Dingemanse. “Rethinking open source generative AI: open washing and the EU AI Act.” The 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. 2024

              • Crotaro@beehaw.org
                0·
                29 days ago

                Does open sourcing require you to give out the training data? I thought it only means allowing access to the source code so that you could build it yourself and feed it your own training data.

                • jarfil@beehaw.org
                  0·
                  29 days ago

                  Open source requires giving whatever digital information is necessary to build a binary.

                  In this case, the “binary” are the network weights, and “whatever is necessary” includes both training data, and training code.

                  DeepSeek is sharing:

                  • NO training data
                  • NO training code
                  • instead, PDFs with a description of the process
                  • binary weights (a few snapshots)
                  • fine-tune code
                  • inference code
                  • evaluation code
                  • integration code

                  In other words: a good amount of open source… with a huge binary blob in the middle.

                  • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
                    0·
                    29 days ago

                    Is there any good LLM that fits this definition of open source, then? I thought the “training data” for good AI was always just: the entire internet, and they were all ethically dubious that way.

                    What is the concern with only having weights? It’s not abritrary code exectution, so there’s no security risk or lack of computing control that are the usual goals of open source in the first place.

                    To me the weights are less of a “blob” and more like an approximate solution to an NP-hard problem. Training is traversing the search space, and sharing a model is just saying “hey, this point looks useful, others should check it out”. But maybe that is a blob, since I don’t know how they got there.