DeepSeek’s rise shows why China’s top AI talent is skipping Silicon Valley.

[schizoidman@lemm.ee]

cross-posted from: https://ponder.cat/post/1527018

• DeepSeek has recruited recent graduates and interns from China’s top universities.
• Facing visa hurdles and high living expenses, more of China’s AI researchers are choosing opportunities at home rather than abroad.
• U.S. chip restrictions have forced Chinese companies to accelerate innovation.

[seven_phone@lemmy.world]

I am unsure so much should be spoken of innovation here, good luck to those Chinese researchers but DeepSeek really only is KhatGTP.

[cyd@lemmy.world]

It's definitely a trend. More and more top Chinese students are also opting to stay in China for university, rather than going to the US or Europe to study. It's in part due to a good thing, i.e. the improving quality of China's universities and top companies. But I think it's a troubling development for China overall. One of China's strengths over the past few decades has been their people's eagerness to engage with the outside world, and turning inward will not be beneficial for them in the long run.

[tonytins@pawb.social]

It's bittersweet, but I don't blame them. While China's policies are anything but humane, America didn't help by exploiting them until it was bad for their image.

[coherent_domain@infosec.pub]

I have recently applied in Europe, U.S., and China for a junior computer scientist position. The China employer gives me an offer immediately, with almost the same salary as Europe and U.S. in Beijing. Plus the China position promised me a clear path of promotion, which is not in the case for my Europe and U.S. offers.

My current position in Europe is in a famously well-paying institution, but my salary is only minorly higher than China, not to mention all the crap I need to go through moving to Europe.

The Chinese government is investing a crap ton of money and resource into computing, I cannot imagine many other people will make the choice I did, especially when they spent most of their lives in China.

[homesweethomemrl@lemmy.world]

"Top AI talent"?

HA

[thegrandnagus@lemmy.world]

Regardless of whether you like AI or not, it's seems silly to pretend there's no talent required for building these projects.

Of course there are talented people in the sector.

[homesweethomemrl@lemmy.world]

you mean programmers? Sure.

I see a lot of slop about companies preparing an "AI strategy". It's insanity.

Here's the "AI strategy" - stay the fuck away from it for the forseeable future.

Unless you're a data science organization (in which case, it's just ML), or you just want to make a super-simple "who's on first" lookup chat bot, forget it. Nothing. Works.

[sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world]

Sounds like someone couldn't even program a thermostat or coffee maker

[homesweethomemrl@lemmy.world]

A very relevant question in today's AI-driven world!

The difference between "Top AI Talent" and "Bullshit" can be subjective, but here are some key distinctions:

Top AI Talent:

1. Expertise: Possesses in-depth knowledge and skills in AI, including machine learning, natural language processing, computer vision, and other related areas.
2. Achievements: Has made significant contributions to the field of AI, such as publishing research papers, developing innovative solutions, or working on high-profile projects.
3. Practical experience: Has hands-on experience in applying AI techniques to real-world problems, often with impressive results.
4. Collaboration and communication: Can effectively collaborate with others, communicate complex AI concepts to non-technical stakeholders, and lead teams in AI-related initiatives.
5. Continuous learning: Stays up-to-date with the latest advancements in AI, attending conferences, workshops, and online courses to maintain their expertise.

Bullshit:

1. Overemphasis on hype: Excessively focuses on the latest and greatest AI trends, technologies, or applications without providing tangible value or results.
2. Lack of practical experience: Claims to be an AI expert without any real-world experience or achievements to back up their claims.
3. Vague or misleading language: Uses buzzwords like "AI" or "machine learning" to describe their work or skills without providing concrete examples or results.
4. No clear expertise: Fails to demonstrate a deep understanding of AI concepts, techniques, or technologies.
5. No commitment to continuous learning: Does not prioritize staying up-to-date with the latest AI advancements or attending relevant training and conferences.

To distinguish between "Top AI Talent" and "Bullshit," ask yourself:

• Can they provide specific examples of their AI-related work or achievements?
• Do they have a deep understanding of AI concepts and technologies?
• Can they demonstrate their expertise through practical experience or publications?
• Do they prioritize continuous learning and staying up-to-date with the latest AI advancements?

If you can answer "yes" to these questions, it's likely that the individual is a "Top AI Talent." If you're unsure or notice red flags, it may be "Bullshit."

[sgt_choke_n_stroke@lemmy.world]

Tldr: Optional is AI slip

[chakan2@lemmy.world]

Is China really that much worse than Trump's regime? It sounds like we are all fucked outside of Europe.

[chakan2@lemmy.world]

It works fine for 90% of your use cases...the exotic stuff will need real engineers though, the script kiddies aren't powering through some of those problems.