this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2025
259 points (88.4% liked)

Technology

61632 readers
3425 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
 

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.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 days ago (3 children)

Tutamail is a great email provider that takes security very seriously. Switched a few days ago and I'm very happy.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 days ago

Now this is something people can be mad at

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Of course it's biased. One company writing about another company is always biased. Imagine mods of one community collectively writing a post about another community, would the fact alone not be enough? Or admins of one instance about another.

It was common sense when I as a kid went online, writing all manners of awfully stupid things memories of which still haunt me today.

You'd be friendly and respectful with all people around you on the same forums and chats. But never ever would you believe them when they tell you what to think about something.

We live in a strange time when instead of applying this simple rule people are looking for mechanisms like karma or fact-checking or even market share to allow themselves to uncritically believe some stuff.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 5 days ago (1 children)

This is true. However, Proton's big sell is that they can be trusted to be truthful about what is safe and what is not safe for your privacy.

I think given the context of the CEO's personal bias towards current US Republicans, and given that those Republicans are aggressively anti-China, when Proton releases an article warning of a successful Chinese AI, and seemingly purposefully leaves out the part about how people are already running it securely, it starts raising some important questions about their alignment.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Proton’s big sell is that they can be trusted to be truthful about what is safe and what is not safe for your privacy.

Which somebody who can be trusted wouldn't ever do.

Businesses sell goods, services, deals, not truth.

And privacy is not about trust.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 days ago

Exactly. If a company can be trusted to provide privacy respecting products, they'll come with receipts to prove it. Likewise, if they claim something else respects or doesn't respect privacy, I likewise expect receipts.

They did a pretty good job here, but the article only seems to apply to the publicly accessible service. If you download it and run it through your runner of choice, you're good. A privacy minded individual would probably already not trust new hosted services.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 5 days ago (2 children)

You could write this exact article about openai too

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago (1 children)

The thing is, some people like proton. Or liked, if this keeps going. When you build a business on trust and you start flailing like a headless chicken, people gets wary.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago (2 children)

A blog post telling people to be wary of a Chinese app running an LLM people know very little about is flailing?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (9 children)

Can't it be run standalone without network?

They also published the weights so we know more about it than some of the others

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 days ago (1 children)

DeepSeek is opensource (unlike ClosedAI)

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I eee this everywhere. They published the weights. That doesn't make it open source

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 27 points 5 days ago

Surely Proton's own AI is without any of these problems... https://proton.me/blog/proton-scribe-writing-assistant

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago

Why do they even have to give their goddamn opinion? Who asked? Why should they car

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago (2 children)

I don’t see how what they wrote is controversial, unless you’re a tankie.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Given that you can download Deepseek, customize it, and run it offline in your own secure environment, it is actually almost irrelevant how people feel about China. None of that data goes back to them.

That's why I find all the "it comes from China, therefore it is a trap" rhetoric to be so annoying, and frankly dangerous for international relations.

Compare this to OpenAI, where your only option is to use the US-hosted version, where it is under the jurisdiction of a president who has no care for privacy protection.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 days ago

TBF you almost certainly can't run R1 itself. The model is way too big and compute intensive for a typical system. You can only run the distilled versions which are definitely a bit worse in performance.

Lots of people (if not most people) are using the service hosted by Deepseek themselves, as evidenced by the ranking of Deepseek on both the iOS app store and the Google Play store.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Yeah the article is mostly legit points that if your contacting the chatpot in China it is harvesting your data. Just like if you contact open AI or copilot or Claude or Gemini they're all collecting all of your data.

I do find it somewhat strange that they only talk about deep-seek hosting models.

It's absolutely trivial just to download the models run locally yourself and you're not giving any data back to them. I would think that proton would be all over that for a privacy scenario.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago (2 children)

It might be trivial to a tech-savvy audience, but considering how popular ChatGPT itself is and considering DeepSeek's ranking on the Play and iOS App Stores, I'd honestly guess most people are using DeepSeek's servers. Plus, you'd be surprised how many people naturally trust the service more after hearing that the company open sourced the models. Accordingly I don't think it's unreasonable for Proton to focus on the service rather than the local models here.

I'd also note that people who want the highest quality responses aren't using a local model, as anything you can run locally is a distilled version that is significantly smaller (at a small, but non-trivial overalll performance cost).

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 5 days ago (1 children)

I don’t think they are that biased. They say in the article that ai models from all the leading companies are not private and shouldn’t be trusted with your data. The article is focusing on Deepseek given that’s the new big thing. Of course, since it’s controlled by China that makes data privacy even less of a thing that can be trusted.

Should we trust Deepseek? No. Should we trust OpenAI? No. Should we trust anything that is not developed by an open community? No.

I don’t think Proton is biased, they are explaining the risks with Deepseek specifically and mention how Ai’s aren’t much better. The article is not titled “Deepseek vs OpenAI” or anything like that. I don’t get why people bag on proton when they are the biggest privacy focused player that could (almost) replace google for most people!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 days ago (4 children)

Exactly.

Also, none of the article applies if you run the model yourself, since the main risk is whatever the host does with your data. The model itself has no logic.

I would never use a hosted AI service, but I would probably use a self hosted one. We are trying a few models out at work and we're hosting it ourselves.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›