Chinese models are open, available to distill, and they also publish papers about their research. Being one year behind is a skill issue.

I think the most of the money would go to purchase hardware, But I hope they can start making adequate compensation for AI engineers and researchers to move forward.

▲

koe123 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

My feeling is that its a difference in how funding works in different places. The USA will go all in with the populations pensions on a gamble, the Chinese subsidize. This way of operating is typical for the EU.

> Being one year behind is a skill issue

E.g. if you are an AI researcher in Europe you can just go to USA and make generational wealth. This is not a criticism of the EU model, but rather insane American capex effectively monopolizing.

> I think the most of the money would go to purchase hardware,

So it's not a skill issue?

	▲	Oras an hour ago \| parent [-]
		> > I think the most of the money would go to purchase hardware, > So it's not a skill issue? I meant by offering sovereign cloud/inference, not for training. But even if it was for training, Chinese labs have limited supply of GPUs, look what they've done. So it is a skill issue. Also to clarify, I didn't mean European engineers' skills, I meant "you get what you pay for" as a company, that's why I hope they start offering better compensation to retain talent.

▲

skeledrew 26 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Where is that skill coming from in the first place? What are they doing to attract, nurture and keep it?

▲

blitzar an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> Chinese models are open, available to distill

Handing in a photo-copy of a photo-copy of a photo-copy of a photo-copy of a photo-copy of a photo-copy of someone else's homework might work once or twice, but it is no way to run a (non grift) business.