OpenAI PROVES DeepSeek COPIED Them! - Video Insight
OpenAI PROVES DeepSeek COPIED Them! - Video Insight
TheAIGRID
Fullscreen
HumanAmplify Chrome Extension Get our Chrome Extension


The video highlights allegations against Deep Seek by OpenAI regarding improper use of models and the potential legal implications involved.

The video discusses allegations from OpenAI that the Chinese AI startup, Deep Seek, improperly used OpenAI's models to train its own AI systems. It discusses the concept of model distillation, where a smaller model learns from a larger one by mimicking its outputs, and argues that Deep Seek's system previously described itself as developed by OpenAI, which could indicate that it was trained on OpenAI outputs. Concerns arise over Deep Seek's rapid advancements in AI capabilities, suggesting they may have gained an unfair advantage by utilizing OpenAI's intellectual property, leading to potential legal action against them. OpenAI's own practices are also scrutinized, as many question their right to complain about data usage when they have also used publicly available data without attribution, raising ethical considerations in AI development.


Content rate: B

The content is informative and delves into significant claims surrounding the practices of Deep Seek and OpenAI, while providing examples and reasoning. However, it includes speculative elements and lacks clear evidence for some assertions, thus preventing it from achieving a higher rating.

AI Legal Technology Ethics Competition

Claims:

Claim: Deep Seek distilled knowledge out of OpenAI's models to train its own AI.

Evidence: The video cites substantial evidence indicating that Deep Seek's capability advancements are consistent with model distillation, and mentions discrepancies in Deep Seek's self-identification before and after claims surfaced.

Counter evidence: Deep Seek could argue that they trained on a large internet dataset which inherently included OpenAI's model outputs, and this does not necessarily imply intentional copying.

Claim rating: 8 / 10

Claim: OpenAI may sue Deep Seek for intellectual property theft.

Evidence: OpenAI's terms of service explicitly prohibit using outputs to develop competing models, which indicates a legal basis for potential action against Deep Seek.

Counter evidence: The legal process can be complex, and OpenAI may struggle to substantiate these claims given that model distillation is an accepted practice in the industry.

Claim rating: 7 / 10

Claim: OpenAI accidentally deleted potential evidence in a previous training data lawsuit.

Evidence: The video details a scenario where OpenAI's engineers reportedly erased critical evidence related to a lawsuit concerning their training data, raising questions about their claims of ownership over the data.

Counter evidence: OpenAI may argue that their data scraping was legal and infamous in many AI models, and they would maintain such practices are standard in the development of AI systems.

Claim rating: 9 / 10

Model version: 0.25 ,chatGPT:gpt-4o-mini-2024-07-18

### Key Points on DeepSeek vs OpenAI 1. **Allegations of Intellectual Property Theft**: OpenAI accuses DeepSeek of distilling knowledge from its models to develop a competing AI, which could lead to a potential lawsuit. 2. **Evidence of Distillation**: DeepSeek previously referred to itself as developed by OpenAI in responses, suggesting it may have trained on OpenAI outputs. This reference has since been changed. 3. **Machine Learning Distillation**: This technique involves a larger "teacher" model (e.g., OpenAI's) generating outputs to train a smaller "student" model (e.g., DeepSeek's), allowing the smaller model to replicate the teacher’s capabilities more efficiently. 4. **Distillation Practices in the Industry**: While distillation is common, the concern arises when it's used to build a rival product, potentially violating OpenAI's terms of service. 5. **OpenAI’s Terms**: OpenAI clearly states in its terms of service that using their outputs to compete is prohibited, giving grounds for legal action against DeepSeek. 6. **Countermeasures Against IP Theft**: OpenAI is reportedly implementing measures to protect its technology from being copied, particularly from foreign entities that are attempting to distill models. 7. **Prior Incidents of Theft**: Historical context includes cases where Chinese entities have been accused of stealing US tech secrets, underlining a pattern that raises suspicions regarding DeepSeek's actions. 8. **OpenAI’s Controversy**: OpenAI itself has been criticized for scraping public data without credit and recently lost potentially critical evidence in a training data lawsuit, highlighting its own contentious practices. 9. **Benchmarking Performance**: DeepSeek's model has performed competitively in human evaluation tests, ranking alongside established models like ChatGPT and Gemini, despite ongoing scrutiny. 10. **Future Implications**: The situation may lead to increased vigilance among AI companies to safeguard their models against unauthorized training from competitors, affecting the broader industry landscape. These points outline the significant developments in the rivalry between OpenAI and DeepSeek, focusing on allegations of IP theft, industry practices, legal repercussions, and competitive performance.