Why would they, both the EU and Mistral specifically, want Chinese models? Isn't the (de facto, underlying) point of the act to raise up homegrown companies like Mistral?

▲

spiderfarmer an hour ago | parent | next [-]

It’s how conspiracy theories work: find out who could theoretically profit, blame them and spread it as fact. It doesn’t have to stand up to scrutiny, if it sounds plausible “you told them like it is”.

▲

satvikpendem an hour ago | parent [-]

That doesn't make any sense because Mistral wouldn't profit if Chinese models are allowed so not sure why the person above thinks the EU would add a China exemption.

	▲	stymaar an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Mistral is serving GLM in addition to their own models. But conspiracy theory don't have to make sense in the first place.

▲

SyneRyder an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

The Chinese models are open weights, so they can host & finetune them in the EU. Mistral is calling them "European Compute Units". Mistral has pivoted to become a hosting provider of open weight LLMs.

"Mistral’s platform will support third-party open models, starting with Z.ai’s GLM-5.2. This and future open models will run on the same infrastructure, regional controls, and service commitments as Mistral models, so customers can broaden model choice without fragmenting where their AI runs."

"European Compute Units, or ECUs, convert those commitments into access to Mistral-built infrastructure over multiple years."

https://mistral.ai/news/regional-inference-open-models-new-c...

▲

pdpi 40 minutes ago | parent [-]

Giving open weight models more leeway “feels” right, but it’s a massive self-pwn based on the mother of all back doors.

It’s a little bit like saying “sysadmins need work visas and vetting, but this guy works for free, so just give him root and don’t think too hard about it”.

	▲	hvb2 2 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		For Europe the choices are, foreign actor A or foreign actor B. I don't think the current US administration has shown themselves to be less hostile than China...