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.
You must log in or register to comment.
Just because you can (pretty easily) self host it doesn’t mean that the privacy concerns aren’t valid.
Lemmy users very biased link to article that isn’t nearly as biased as they are purposefully biasing.
Maybe this community needs stricter posting guidelines to avoid this sort of drivel?
Except you can’t run it.
Every model You are downloading and running is simply just a checkpoint of llama…
Quit spreading that misinformation.
You, and the grand majority of everyone else, doesn’t have anywhere near the hardware to run the actual full deepseek model
I run one a of the smaller model on an M1 max and it’s working pretty good. Much better than I would jave thought. Some guys on youtube manage to get the 600b parameters models to run on sub 5k hardware. It’s a total game changer. In a couple of years it will probably run loccaly on phones.
DeepSeek is open source, meaning you can modify code[…] on your own app to create an independent — and more secure — version. However, using DeepSeek in its current form — as it exists today, hosted in China — comes with serious risks for anyone concerned about their most sensitive, private information.
They are not wrong here.
After having read the article fully it doesn’t seem to be that partial and acknowledge also the failing of others. It is not as stupid as the CEO stance on “Republicans helping the little guys” for sure.
Wait. Protons CEO is conservative?
I will let you decide : https://theintercept.com/2025/01/28/proton-mail-andy-yen-trump-republicans/
But that’s also true for American companies.
As a European, I trust them as much as I trust Chinese ones.
Ho yeah but they are definitely not ignoring that in the article. It’s just that they are talking mostly about the subject of the article which is: deepseek
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
That’s not why. Almost no one is going to do that. That’s why they didn’t mention it.
They are absolutely right! Most people don’t give a fuck about hosting their own AI, they just download “Deepsneak” and chat…and it is unfortunately even worse than “ClosedAI”, cuz they are based in China. Thats why I hope Duckduckgo will host deepseek on their servers (as it is very lightweight in resources, yes?), then we will all benefit from it.
Tutamail is a great email provider that takes security very seriously. Switched a few days ago and I’m very happy.
Yet not great from a privacy perspective. They don’t even allow third party email apps.
That’s because your inbox is completely encrypted. As far as I know, no client provides support for that.
Now this is something people can be mad at
You could write this exact article about openai too
The article goes into great detail about how it’s different from OpenAI so, no.
Surely Proton’s own AI is without any of these problems… https://proton.me/blog/proton-scribe-writing-assistant
Why do they even have to give their goddamn opinion? Who asked? Why should they car
I don’t see how what they wrote is controversial, unless you’re a tankie.
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.
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.
How do you know you’re running anything securely? How many people have actually audited the code?
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!
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.
A quote from the article:
DeepSeek is open source, meaning you can modify code(new window) on your own app to create an independent — and more secure — version. This has led some to hope that a more privacy-friendly version of DeepSeek could be developed.
This is just plain wrong. The model doesn’t contain the privacy unfriendly logic and can be used freely and unmodified. In fact, there are plenty of other platforms available right now where you can use it that are not Chinese.
This article makes fair points, if you ignore the fact that they don’t know what they’re talking about. You need to fix the errors in your head while reading it for it to make sense. If you don’t have the knowledge to do that, the whole article is a bit misleading.
True, hosting deepseek yourself is much better. I’d still wait and see if anyone finds weird stuff in the code itself but tbh idk how long that could take.
Can’t wait for the models to get better and hopefully stay open source!
weird stuff in the code
What code? We use a different runner for the model so we can run multiple different AI models, so the only thing we’re getting from DeepSeek is the model.
I hate AI but on the other hand I love how Deepseek is causing AI companies to lose billions.
The desperate PR campaign against deepseek is also very entertaining.
Billionaires are really pissed about it, I’m happy.
We’re playing with it at work and I honestly don’t understand the hype. It’s super verbose and would take longer for me to read the output than do the research myself. And it’s still often wrong.
It’s cool I guess, and I’m still looking for a good use case, but it’s still a ways from taking over the world.
I’ve found AI quicker at getting information. Search on the net is garbage find old articles that no longer are relavent or having to shift through pages of unrelated shit till you find what you want.
The same is also true of ChatGPT. On the surface the results are incredibly believable but when you dig into it or try to use some of the generated code it’s nonsense.
I certainly think it’s cool, but the further you stray from the beaten path, the more newly janky it gets. I’m sure there’s a good workflow here, it’ll just take some time to find it.
