News U.S. investigates whether DeepSeek smuggled Nvidia AI GPUs via Singapore

[Admin]

The U.S. government believes that DeepSeek illegally obtained Nvidia GPUs through Singapore, now accounting for 22% of its revenue. Nvidia denies any wrongdoing.

U.S. investigates whether DeepSeek smuggled Nvidia AI GPUs via Singapore : Read more

 

[hotaru251]

He argued that China should compete fairly

when the product (ai) is done stealing every bit of knowledge possible no person taking part is competing fair as the base of the product is unfairly used content.

 

[_Shatta_AD_]

There we go again, US stifling the competition and seeding doubts in an attempt to taint progress whenever the competitor surpasses them. They’re inhibiting the progress of humanity, industry and technology as a whole. Instead of welcoming competition, this whole US must remain dominant ideology is the downfall of global tech progress and worsening the trend of monetization of technology thereby denying accessibility.
Sure researchers and developers work hard to develop new tech and must be rewarded but denying accessibility to the broader public by putting a massive paywall behind everything isn’t going to improve that tech. It’ll reach a point of stagnation and complacency. Nvidia is a prime example. The lack of competition has turn the level of innovation down a few notches and now simply relying on AI to do the heavy lifting or so called ‘improvements’ rather than hard improvements in rasterization/rendering architecture. This will only get worse the more the US keep stifling out competition. What the US is doing at this point is asking the rest of the world to reinvent the wheel, heck the whole car and its basic operating principle.
When scientists, engineers work together globally, that’s when all sorts of major new discoveries are made.

 

[Integr8d]

There we go again, US stifling the competition and seeding doubts in an attempt to taint progress whenever the competitor surpasses them. They’re inhibiting the progress of humanity, industry and technology as a whole. Instead of welcoming competition, this whole US must remain dominant ideology is the downfall of global tech progress and worsening the trend of monetization of technology thereby denying accessibility.
Sure researchers and developers work hard to develop new tech and must be rewarded but denying accessibility to the broader public by putting a massive paywall behind everything isn’t going to improve that tech. It’ll reach a point of stagnation and complacency. Nvidia is a prime example. The lack of competition has turn the level of innovation down a few notches and now simply relying on AI to do the heavy lifting or so called ‘improvements’ rather than hard improvements in rasterization/rendering architecture. This will only get worse the more the US keep stifling out competition. What the US is doing at this point is asking the rest of the world to reinvent the wheel, heck the whole car and its basic operating principle.
When scientists, engineers work together globally, that’s when all sorts of major new discoveries are made.

"When scientists, engineers work together globally..." says it all. This is a massive logical fallacy that literally flies in the face of what DeepSeek has supposedly created (a small, private venture and wildly efficient AI model). Dribbling out feel-good platitudes doesn't change reality.

The problem with countries like China is that they leech technology. And what they can't leech, they steal. That is because the East and the West diverge on the concepts of Intellectual Property. But it's more appropriate to say that it's rich countries versus poor countries. Rich countries invest a lot into high-technology. They expect a return on their investments. Poor countries naturally side with the concept of 'free' and 'sharing' because they have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

China has done well and is feeding its people based on their hard work in the fields where they can contribute. But the Intellectual Property has not been earned. It has been stolen. And China MUST respect this value. If it doesn't, America can easily open its door and import millions of workers directly. This is not a problem for us.

 

[Mcnoobler]

I'm going to go on a limb here... all those people who bought 4090s and only got the PCB, was because the actual chips went to China. How do they track that? China can get the boards, it was only the chips that were banned.

 

[Gururu]

So OpenAI has a government funded hit job on DeepSeek. OpenAI should sue nVidia IMO for selling to every smuggler in the business.

 

[bit_user]

It'd be funny if they added up all the power those GPUs should be using and it turned out to exceed the capacity of Singapore's electric grid.

 

[bit_user]

seeding doubts in an attempt to taint progress whenever the competitor surpasses them.

The concerns seem legit. Experts have looked at their claimed optimizations and they still don't add up to what should be needed to train on the hardware they claimed.

They’re inhibiting the progress of humanity, industry and technology as a whole.

The sanctions are meant to inhibit AI-powered warfare by the listed entities.

Nvidia is a prime example. The lack of competition has turn the level of innovation down a few notches and now simply relying on AI to do the heavy lifting or so called ‘improvements’ rather than hard improvements in rasterization/rendering architecture.

Blackwell did improve rasterization.

Source: https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-geforce-rtx-5090-review/4
​

But it could only do so in line with how much bigger the die could get. That's because we've been optimizing the rasterization problem for the past 30 years and it's basically now at a point where performance basically is a function of how many transistors you can throw at the problem and how fast they can switch. Right now, that's running up against surging demand for the latest nodes for AI applications, so Blackwell ended up being stuck on a 4 nm-class node.

As for DLSS, I think the tech is solid. Framegen isn't worth much, as it really doesn't help unless your base framerate is already pretty high (north of 60 fps), but the image-scaling part of it is great for people with 4k monitors who want the benefits they provide for productivity apps but don't want to sacrifice on framerate.

This will only get worse the more the US keep stifling out competition.

You've provided no evidence to support this. You can't fit a trend to one (questionable) data point.

What the US is doing at this point is asking the rest of the world to reinvent the wheel, heck the whole car and its basic operating principle.

No, that's not what it's asking.

 

[bit_user]

I'm going to go on a limb here... all those people who bought 4090s and only got the PCB, was because the actual chips went to China. How do they track that? China can get the boards, it was only the chips that were banned.

Is that the thinking? Or did they maybe buy RTX 4090D boards and just transplant the GPUs from regular RTX 4090's to them?

 

[Gaidax]

I'm going to go on a limb here... all those people who bought 4090s and only got the PCB, was because the actual chips went to China. How do they track that? China can get the boards, it was only the chips that were banned.

I mean sure, but that does not refute the very real "possibility" that China got full blown AI GPUs from various third-party companies outside China that skirted the rules.

And that "possibility" is like, yeah they got it, let's not play pretend.

 

[scottslayer]

The Semianalysis estimate from last year was 1 million banned chips and 800,000 non-banned chips coming into China via other countries every month.

 

[YSCCC]

Is that the thinking? Or did they maybe buy RTX 4090D boards and just transplant the GPUs from regular RTX 4090's to them?

It's a "why not both", I do believe they try import the full blown ones via some overseas companies or smuggling, and then scalp all those 4090 and desolder the chip to their own boards to do AI works, it's not difficult to get a schematic of a PCB for asus as example and print their own

 

[t3t4]

Who cares how it happened..... Sanctions don't work and DeepSeek still exists. Pointing fingers won't unbreak that egg!

 

[Loadedaxe]

There we go again, US stifling the competition and seeding doubts in an attempt to taint progress whenever the competitor surpasses them. They’re inhibiting the progress of humanity, industry and technology as a whole. Instead of welcoming competition, this whole US must remain dominant ideology is the downfall of global tech progress and worsening the trend of monetization of technology thereby denying accessibility.
Sure researchers and developers work hard to develop new tech and must be rewarded but denying accessibility to the broader public by putting a massive paywall behind everything isn’t going to improve that tech. It’ll reach a point of stagnation and complacency. Nvidia is a prime example. The lack of competition has turn the level of innovation down a few notches and now simply relying on AI to do the heavy lifting or so called ‘improvements’ rather than hard improvements in rasterization/rendering architecture. This will only get worse the more the US keep stifling out competition. What the US is doing at this point is asking the rest of the world to reinvent the wheel, heck the whole car and its basic operating principle.
When scientists, engineers work together globally, that’s when all sorts of major new discoveries are made.

You raise valid concerns about the impact of monopolization and geopolitical maneuvering on technological progress. The balance between protecting national interests and fostering global innovation is a tricky one.

However, it's also important to recognize that competition isn't just about allowing anyone to enter the market freely, it’s also about ensuring fair play. Some of the restrictions and policies the U.S. enforces are driven by concerns over security, intellectual property theft, and the strategic importance of emerging technologies. While it’s true that protectionist policies can sometimes slow down progress, history has also shown that unchecked competition can lead to exploitative practices, lack of ethical oversight, and security risks.

On the topic of monetization, there's no denying that the high cost of cutting-edge technology, especially in industries like AI and semiconductors, creates accessibility issues. But the counterargument is that R&D costs are enormous, and companies need a return on investment to sustain innovation. That said, the lack of competition in certain sectors, like GPUs, does tend to slow down real innovation, as you pointed out with Nvidia. True competition drives better products, more affordable access, and prevents stagnation.

The best way forward is not necessarily eliminating all barriers but finding a middle ground where competition is fair, innovation is rewarded, and technology remains accessible. Ideally, this would involve more global collaboration, however, that also requires trust and accountability on all sides.

 

[Loadedaxe]

Who cares how it happened..... Sanctions don't work and DeepSeek still exists. Pointing fingers won't unbreak that egg!

The fact that DeepSeek still exists doesn’t necessarily mean sanctions don’t work, it just means that no measure is absolute. Sanctions aren’t about instantly stopping progress, they're about slowing down technological advancements in strategic areas, limiting access to critical resources, and increasing development costs for targeted entities.

Sure, pointing fingers won’t "unbreak the egg," but understanding how it happened is crucial for shaping future policies and responses. Ignoring the "how" just opens the door for history to repeat itself. The real question is whether sanctions are achieving their intended goals and what the long-term consequences are, both intended and unintended.

 

[YSCCC]

You raise valid concerns about the impact of monopolization and geopolitical maneuvering on technological progress. The balance between protecting national interests and fostering global innovation is a tricky one.

However, it's also important to recognize that competition isn't just about allowing anyone to enter the market freely, it’s also about ensuring fair play. Some of the restrictions and policies the U.S. enforces are driven by concerns over security, intellectual property theft, and the strategic importance of emerging technologies. While it’s true that protectionist policies can sometimes slow down progress, history has also shown that unchecked competition can lead to exploitative practices, lack of ethical oversight, and security risks.

On the topic of monetization, there's no denying that the high cost of cutting-edge technology, especially in industries like AI and semiconductors, creates accessibility issues. But the counterargument is that R&D costs are enormous, and companies need a return on investment to sustain innovation. That said, the lack of competition in certain sectors, like GPUs, does tend to slow down real innovation, as you pointed out with Nvidia. True competition drives better products, more affordable access, and prevents stagnation.

The best way forward is not necessarily eliminating all barriers but finding a middle ground where competition is fair, innovation is rewarded, and technology remains accessible. Ideally, this would involve more global collaboration, however, that also requires trust and accountability on all sides.

I would get this in simpler arguement, competition is in general, good to the general public as there will always be some new talented ppl find ways to make things better, cheaper and more accessible, but the way that current chinese companies are doing in commercial espionage, right out skin swarpping and earning money themselves etc. isn't competition, it's killing competition or innovation as those who invested their time and money into the new stuffs will surely gets outcompeted with the cloners, and when everyone saw this repetitively, those who are willing to innovate will die off and everyone is waiting to copy other's innovation and claim victory, the wolrd will stagnate

 

[Loadedaxe]

I would get this in simpler arguement, competition is in general, good to the general public as there will always be some new talented ppl find ways to make things better, cheaper and more accessible, but the way that current chinese companies are doing in commercial espionage, right out skin swarpping and earning money themselves etc. isn't competition, it's killing competition or innovation as those who invested their time and money into the new stuffs will surely gets outcompeted with the cloners, and when everyone saw this repetitively, those who are willing to innovate will die off and everyone is waiting to copy other's innovation and claim victory, the wolrd will stagnate

You bring up a great point about the potential negative effects of unchecked copying and commercial espionage. Healthy competition drives innovation by rewarding those who invest in research and development, moving industries forward.

However, when companies focus solely on cloning rather than creating, it discourages true innovation, leading to stagnation rather than progress.

Sustainable competition should balance accessibility with the protection of intellectual property to ensure a thriving market.

Or...history repeats itself.

 

[autobahn]

There are a bunch of smaller cloud providers that focus on providing GPU resources. What's to stop some Chinese shell corp. in a non-embargo nation from buying g a bunch of cloud GPU resources in one of these datacenters, in Singapore or other nation, and then Chinese AI developers just remoting into those resources over a VPN?

 

[Loadedaxe]

There are a bunch of smaller cloud providers that focus on providing GPU resources. What's to stop some Chinese shell corp. in a non-embargo nation from buying g a bunch of cloud GPU resources in one of these datacenters, in Singapore or other nation, and then Chinese AI developers just remoting into those resources over a VPN?

The problem with this scenario are regulatory oversight, contractual restrictions, and technical monitoring by cloud providers and governments.

Do you really thing the "eyes in the sky" are not watching?

 

[t3t4]

There are a bunch of smaller cloud providers that focus on providing GPU resources. What's to stop some Chinese shell corp. in a non-embargo nation from buying g a bunch of cloud GPU resources in one of these datacenters, in Singapore or other nation, and then Chinese AI developers just remoting into those resources over a VPN?

Exactly! AI will find a way, those creating AI will not let a petty thing like sanctions stop them from doing what they do. Cocaine is illegal too, don't mean I can't go right down the street to get the stuff! It doesn't matter the rules or the enforcement, if I want a "thing", then I'm gonna get the "thing", plain and simple!

 

[AkroZ]

"When scientists, engineers work together globally..." says it all. This is a massive logical fallacy that literally flies in the face of what DeepSeek has supposedly created (a small, private venture and wildly efficient AI model). Dribbling out feel-good platitudes doesn't change reality.

The problem with countries like China is that they leech technology. And what they can't leech, they steal. That is because the East and the West diverge on the concepts of Intellectual Property. But it's more appropriate to say that it's rich countries versus poor countries. Rich countries invest a lot into high-technology. They expect a return on their investments. Poor countries naturally side with the concept of 'free' and 'sharing' because they have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

China has done well and is feeding its people based on their hard work in the fields where they can contribute. But the Intellectual Property has not been earned. It has been stolen. And China MUST respect this value. If it doesn't, America can easily open its door and import millions of workers directly. This is not a problem for us.

Funny as in Europe, USA is known to steal intellectual properties. In Europe the law said the first to invent something have the IP, in the USA it's the first to deposit a brevet in the USA. So many americans push brevets in the USA of european technologies and after go into a lawsuit to obtain compensations on products sold. It's what you call American technology.
Most USA technologies are made by the USA but not all of the world technologies belongs to USA.
It's the same for China, they invests heavily in researches and it's paying. We doesn't known if H100 was used but DeepSeek is conceived to use the "limited" resources of H800 better.

 

[kjfatl]

"When scientists, engineers work together globally..." says it all. This is a massive logical fallacy that literally flies in the face of what DeepSeek has supposedly created (a small, private venture and wildly efficient AI model). Dribbling out feel-good platitudes doesn't change reality.

The problem with countries like China is that they leech technology. And what they can't leech, they steal. That is because the East and the West diverge on the concepts of Intellectual Property. But it's more appropriate to say that it's rich countries versus poor countries. Rich countries invest a lot into high-technology. They expect a return on their investments. Poor countries naturally side with the concept of 'free' and 'sharing' because they have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

China has done well and is feeding its people based on their hard work in the fields where they can contribute. But the Intellectual Property has not been earned. It has been stolen. And China MUST respect this value. If it doesn't, America can easily open its door and import millions of workers directly. This is not a problem for us.

China, with 1/3 of world manufacturing meets the definition of being a rich county. They are better described as a monopoly with no limits, regularly stealing, or doing whatever else it takes to grow their market share.

 

[TommyCC]

"When scientists, engineers work together globally..." says it all. This is a massive logical fallacy that literally flies in the face of what DeepSeek has supposedly created (a small, private venture and wildly efficient AI model). Dribbling out feel-good platitudes doesn't change reality.

The problem with countries like China is that they leech technology. And what they can't leech, they steal. That is because the East and the West diverge on the concepts of Intellectual Property. But it's more appropriate to say that it's rich countries versus poor countries. Rich countries invest a lot into high-technology. They expect a return on their investments. Poor countries naturally side with the concept of 'free' and 'sharing' because they have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

China has done well and is feeding its people based on their hard work in the fields where they can contribute. But the Intellectual Property has not been earned. It has been stolen. And China MUST respect this value. If it doesn't, America can easily open its door and import millions of workers directly. This is not a problem for us.

https://aiindex.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/HAI_AI-Index-Report-2024.pdf
China has almost 3X of granted patents in AI as of 2022. How can they steal that we don't have?

 

[Integr8d]

https://aiindex.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/HAI_AI-Index-Report-2024.pdf
China has almost 3X of granted patents in AI as of 2022. How can they steal that we don't have?

View: https://youtu.be/K-50unyv7po?si=9EnsPBJ2KsSn1liN

China steals plenty. This not a secret to anyone.