this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2025
253 points (87.8% liked)

Technology

61344 readers
3950 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
253
Proton's very biased article on Deepseek (lemmy.ml)
submitted 2 days ago by JOMusic@lemmy.ml to c/technology@lemmy.world
110 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Article: https://proton.me/blog/deepseek

Calls it "Deepsneak", failing to make it clear that the reason people love Deepseek is that you can download and it run it securely on any of your own private devices or servers - unlike most of the competing SOTA AIs.

I can't speak for Proton, but the last couple weeks are showing some very clear biases coming out.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

We're playing with it at work and I honestly don't understand the hype. It's super verbose and would take longer for me to read the output than do the research myself. And it's still often wrong.

It's cool I guess, and I'm still looking for a good use case, but it's still a ways from taking over the world.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 2 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

I've found AI quicker at getting information. Search on the net is garbage find old articles that no longer are relavent or having to shift through pages of unrelated shit till you find what you want.

[–] Rogue@feddit.uk 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The same is also true of ChatGPT. On the surface the results are incredibly believable but when you dig into it or try to use some of the generated code it's nonsense.

[–] Auli@lemmy.ca 1 points 19 hours ago

Oh it works and works well sure might need some tweaking or prompt changing but it is decent at code gen.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago

I certainly think it's cool, but the further you stray from the beaten path, the more newly janky it gets. I'm sure there's a good workflow here, it'll just take some time to find it.