Startup founders urge U.S. government not to shut off Chinese open weight AI
politico.com510 points by theanonymousone 5 hours ago
510 points by theanonymousone 5 hours ago
https://static.politico.com/4a/bf/9c4021d8404386b0a311dcccf0...
I‘m not even sure what the argument for banning Chinese models/open weights even is supposed to be? 1. if it’s to stop hackers doing hacking things with „uncontrollable models“ then, well… they’re already doing something illegal to begin with, why would they care about breaking another law running these models? 2. if it’s to stop foreign actors, then that ban would not apply to them anyway 3. it’s not stopping distillation either, Chinese labs are already banned from using US frontier models and look at how good that is working I don’t get it. Am I missing something? The only thing a ban would do is protect the American market from further downward price pressure on inference, protecting VC investors in the short term. But thats also an admittance that the American labs can’t compete on merit anymore, and should by itself also limit the viability of the idea that all those VC billions will ever make a return? In any case this would be something benefitting only a very few for a short time (labs + investors). Someone please enlighten me what the actual argument here is, cause I can’t see it. > Someone please enlighten me what the actual argument here is, cause I can’t see it. > The only thing a ban would do is protect the American market from further downward price pressure on inference, protecting VC investors in the short term. But thats also an admittance that the American labs can’t compete on merit anymore That's the argument. To be precise the publicly stated argument is that they're attacking American providers by distilling. The real aim is to eliminate competition because otherwise Anthropic and OpenAI are non viable and the US views them as crucial for winning the 'AI race' which they see as putting whoever wins it on top in terms of warfare/economic power etc. But isn‘t the whole argument of „winner takes all“ already dead, if china is such a big threat that the US labs need import controls? Distilling or not, they are clearly close enough to the frontier, that the supposed „free market“ country needs market controls. That may work for US markets. But not the rest of the world. Idea: petrodollar policy becomes „tokendollar“, enforced by US military dominance. If you force me to pay altman at gunpoint, then maybe ill stop using kimi They are simply out of ideas to keep the most expensive party in the history of mankind going. That's it. Simple as that. When you grasp for straws in panic mode, you don't exactly spend time strategizing and weighing the pros and cons of each straw carefully. Yea, elections have consequences and we voted in a corrupt, bribable, moron. Also, the moron says the elections aren't secure and that 2020 was stolen but not 2024 or 2016 for some reason. How could you tell how close they are to the frontier if they weren't distilling? Clearly those labs think distilling is worth it despite the large effort they need to go through to bypass anti distillation techniques used by the frontier labs I find such beauty in the fact that the robbers are getting robbed but it's all part of progress overall. It's not that China won't come up with what the US are coming up with. Just a matter of when it would happen. > But thats also an admittance that the American labs can’t compete on merit anymore This is exactly it. Try to buy a BYD in the United States. You can't (without a complicated process) because they're so much better cars than our domestic brands that our domestic brands couldn't compete and lobbied to keep them out. > should by itself also limit the viability of the idea that all those VC billions will ever make a return? It just has to last until the next quarter / fundraising round. You aren’t missing anything. There isn’t an actual argument, this is strictly an attempt at regulatory capture. You wouldn't distill billions of dollars of SoftBank investment. Is "You wouldn't distill..." the hot new Twitter meme or something? It's a riff on the classic MPAA slogan during the Napster / BitTorrent era, "You wouldn't download a car." ... Yes I would. It's free real estate. The CFO or wtv that tweeted, their argument was, if you allow cheap free competitive models, you will stop the influx of capital in frontier development of even more powerful LLMs, thus capping how far the tech could reach. Obviously, they're mostly asking for regulation to save their money, but it seems their argument is that without an environment that rewards the development of the next frontier model the tech might not evolve as fast. > it seems their argument is that without an environment that rewards the development of the next frontier model the tech might not evolve as fast. This is precisely what the people worried about AI risk and job displacement want, so they should be strongly in favor of open weights then, right? > thus capping how far the tech could reach I just don’t buy it. There’s still gonna be demand for stronger models. Sure growth will be slower, but this might even drive a push for more cost efficient training / inference and/or new architectures if money is harder to come by. Yeah, I agree with this take. When there's less capital floating around it will make these labs prioritize shrinking the models so less hardware (or older hardware) is needed to run a model with the same or similar capabilities. They'll have to do that simply because the cost of running the models will become more important. It also might end up pushing us towards LLM ASICs assuming the model progress slows significantly. > There’s still gonna be demand for stronger models. potential issue is those will be Chinese models if they win, which could be national security matter. it's simple. AI labs and investors are scared, and pushing administration to ban them, because they can't compete with Chinese models soon, similar to how they banned Huawei, and Chinese cars. When there is cheaper alternative, companies might go with self hosting option, which reduces the enterprise moat of AI labs > similar to how they banned Huawei, and Chinese cars. And that will go as well as it went for both > The only thing a ban would do is protect the American market from further downward price pressure on inference, protecting VC investors in the short term It won't even do this. Streisand effect will probably draw even more attention to the open weight models The entire marketing narrative in AI already operates this way --- "GPT 2.0 is too dangerous to release, oh noooo!" etc How would it even be stopped if you could ban it? It's not like you're banning just one company. Anyone with the resources can still obtain and run the models. Sure, big models like Kimi K3 will be less accessible until a foreign version of Openrouter with no incentive to listen to US law begins offering it. Or they offer it and obfuscate what model it actually is behind codenames. It wouldn't surprise me if that kind of problem is partially why weights are open. Because you can't meaningfully stomp them out completely. The interest to target large corps who pay for LLMs. I don't think Antrhopic/OAI care what you or me are running in basement. It will force US companies (and EU probably) to buy only from OpenAI/Anthropic. The point would be to not allow (mostly) Chinese agencies to profit from the American market by ripping off (mostly) American frontier models. Just like unlicensed dupes of designer goods can be intercepted at the border. > But thats also an admittance that the American labs can’t compete on merit anymore Merit was never competitive. Mass consumption habits select hard for cost, and this is an industry driven entirely by scaling factors. If you can scale for cheaper, you win. Ivy League-decorated researchers aren't doing RnD for free. The frontier labs can only go so cheap before they're so far in the red that VC gets cold feet. Leaving the expensive frontier research up to private enterprise wasn't a long-term strategy. > I don’t get it. Am I missing something? The only thing a ban would do is protect the American market from further downward price pressure on inference What's not to get? Do you understand how much money is tied up in the industry? Do you know what happens if that goes up in flames? In the middle of a massive asymmetric economic depression? Why on earth do you think they would just sit there and watch it happen? Because of political virtue signaling about free markets? You know, I have a bridge to sell you if you're interested. > Do you know what happens if that goes up in flames I think in capitalism thats called a market correction? > Do you understand how much money is tied up in the industry? If the free market „virtue signaling“ no longer matters, then they could’ve also put a stop-gap on investment volume to protect the economy against over-reliance? Or how about go full plan-economy and just dictate price per token until investors get their money back? I’m joking around but of course I understand whats tied up in this. I just don’t see how banning open source models is helping any of that in the long run. > then they could’ve also put a stop-gap on investment volume to protect the economy against over-reliance? Which instantly collapses the load bearing bull market. They can't do that for the same reason they can't do anything about the insanity of the real estate market. The fallout would be existential. The economy isn't rational, remember. It's highly reactive and, no matter how strong your state is, always out of your control at the end of the day. America is years away from being able to rotate meaningful volumes of capital into heavy industry. Until then, AI has to outpace the cooling of the tech sector, while also contributing to it. The entire political strategy in play is a frantic spinning plate game. There is no long run if it fails, so that is their strategy as far as we can see. Or maybe they're just maliciously incompetent. Given the American administration opaquely decided starting a forever war in the Red Sea was a solid choice at this point in time, possibly to try and fluff up an auxilliary bull market with the MIC, we really can't rule that one out. Suppose a foreign actor deliberately builds an unaligned model, and dumps it at a very low cost through subsidies. Since the cost is lower, everyone integrates it into their business. But now the foreign actor has control; perhaps the model checks for instructions to execute, perhaps it has backdoors, perhaps... who knows? I don't have a view on whether this is a sufficient argument to ban models from potential adversaries, but it's not as trivial as "regulatory capture". The problem with this argument is that sharing model weights only has downsides for said foreign actor compared to providing a cloud service. Since the suspicion exists, security companies are going to comb over the weights and discover every hidden secret of the model, while with a cloud provider you send your most sensitive data to a remote server, and trust the AI lab wont train on your data, with the only shield being a TOS. While with a local modal, even sending a peep about your internal data without cause would be scandalous. It's not even going to be a good honeypot - since said actor doesn't really provide inference, people will have to pay for and run the infrastructure of these models, which bad guys cannot even subsidize, unlike cloud based provides. This is literally what all AI is right now. Anthropic has been paying companies to use its product to form that dependency and maybe they're not misaligned but there's no regulation in the US that'd in anyway deter them from purposefully misaligning their model. Subsidizing a product to capture market share is very different from exploiting a national security attack vector. Sorry, to clarify - this isn't just "offering it at a loss" Anthropic is directly paying PE firms to enroll their held companies in their services[1]. When it comes to a question of whether this is a national security attack vector I think there isn't a cut and dry argument and people could go either way but... private companies are not necessarily aligned with the US government even when contracted with the US government (see Starlink Ukraine shenanigans) and the steps the US government usually would take with highly critical infrastructure to ensure alignment haven't been taken - in my opinion at least, this is definitely a very subjective area. 1. https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/anthropic-in-talks-to-invest-200... So some kind of „sleeper agent“ model? Seems a bit far fetched, given that I’ve never seen any PoC/research on this topic. Got any pointers? To be fair the fix to this seems to be that American labs would need to adjust to the new „fair market price“ then, right? Subsidy-backed competition is still legitimate competition in capitalism (e.g. Uber). And you could still ban specific, known malicious models/labs instead of blanket open-source bans. What about Mistral models, for example. It is much more difficult to embed a "sleeper agent" in an LLM than it is to do the same in any closed-source program. An LLM is a collection of inert data, it is not an automaton. You obtain an automaton only using an inference program, like llama.cpp or anyone of the many others, and then using some harness around the inference program. You can put in the harness all kinds of guards, to detect any possible harmful action and prevent it. In something like a CPU from Intel or AMD it is easy to put some undetectable backdoor that would allow the remote control of the computer, unless you disconnect any antennas and you filter all wired network traffic through an external firewall that would allow only whitelisted connections. On the other hand an LLM is a much less plausible attack vector, as long as you host the inference yourself. Only an LLM that runs externally, e.g. at OpenAI or Anthropic, can be really dangerous. I'm not advocating for the policy, I'm just saying that there is a legitimate argument that's not so easy to dismiss. > And you could still ban specific, known malicious models/labs instead of blanket open-source bans With publicly available models today, absolutely. With models 10000x more powerful, we would need to be extremely conservative. (In that world everything is upside down, though; I don't know if "banning" is even a meaningful concept in that reality) > With models 10000x more powerful, we would need to be extremely conservative I agree, I even think we’re already there if yesterdays OpenAI/HuggingFace story is legit. We need to start building these agent systems in a way so that it won’t matter if a model is compromised. Malicious models is one way, but prompt injection is also still an unsolved problem. And if you solve that, then a malicious model is also no longer a threat. Data exfiltration maybe, but IMO US labs are probably also doing that for training, even if saying otherwise (of course I have no evidence of that, but the temptation must be insane) > Suppose By supposing, you can try to justify taking just about anything away. I am not supposing a low-risk event. This is an obvious attack vector that an adversary would almost certainly exploit. I would exploit it if I were them. You're supposing an event that there's no evidence for happening and that is on par with 'let's ban open source software because some open source software could be malicious'. Let's not forget that as of now most models are like game cartridges i.e. they need a 'host' to run i.e. llama.cpp - they're not executable code by themselves. I could see an argument for a security review prior to integrating a model into a highly sensitive industry/agency, but that is standard for any software. It's certainly not an argument for banning open models because US AI corps don't want to compete with them. Imagine a model that's 10000x more intelligent than any human. You integrate that model into a sensitive industry. You now effectively have an extremely powerful foreign agent running e.g. your energy sector. This is qualitatively very different than a backdoor in Redis. I agree this is science fiction-y, but given the pace of progress I don't think it's so easy to dismiss. You can’t start policy justifications with “imagine” like that. Maybe if you’re the Beatles. I don't think there actually is a congnizant argument other than to protect investments. And of course they cant say that.
You are using way to much logic in this. You are witnessing powerful people who are operating way outside the scope of their own abilities thrash around.
AI isn't being stopped. Definitely not by people who value money. The inertia at this point is probably even too much for those who have some sort of ideological framework against it.
To those of us who value ideas and progress, especially a non human-centric idea of what progress could look like, the path looks pretty clear.
there is no stopping this. We are working everyday in so many small ways, not to capture value, but to advance the machine.
the idea that some decree from an ageing narcissist and a pyramid of lackey bureaucrats is at all meaningful is just hilarious. Of course it's meaningful to the "economics". But many of us could really not care a lick as we don't do it for money. Working so far keeping Chinese EVs out of the U.S.: U.S. car company CEOs say publicly that allowing them in will destroy the domestic auto industry overnight. I agree that many of the rich and powerful are not at all as ingenious, creative or capable as they like to make themselves out to be, but I don't see a clear/easy way to escape the economic ramifications of the fact that they own and control virtually all physical resources and all political power. If, say, Chinese develop AGI, and that makes US tech companies obsolete - I see them banning Chinese AGI, even going to war, rather than ceding power (realistically there may be some backroom deal), they would grind the population into dust if it let them retain their wealth and power. Sounds familiar, I used to think the same about the Internet and free software. Turned out, the old world digested the unstoppable march of progress just fine. Is that why Linux failed? Just imagine the world in which an open source kernel dominated almost every compute market on the planet! > And of course they cant say that That’s what I don’t get tho, I think in today’s world they totally could? „We need to protect US investments as our entire economy depends on this market sector“ seems like something that would be soothing to me as an investor? It’s not like the big money givers can’t see that china is close, it’s been the news multiple times already. But taking active policy steps to protect against that should boost market confidence, no? Instead we get alibi arguments to accomplish the same thing in the end? I think you are confusing the tiny amount of people who are actually investors or stand to directly benefit from these companies with the overall population - the overall population being generally against AI at this point. 'We must protect VC profits at the cost of the rest of the economy and our entire 'free market' system' probably doesn't sound as good. No I’m not confusing them. I am very aware it’s mainly policy for a minority of people. But this minority drives the markets. This administration has done a lot for that minority already so I don’t think anyone would be too surprised? In this case they can even claim to protect the greater economy, a crash of which does impact the majority. „US good, China bad“ has been a long term talking point by Trump too and this would neatly fit into that to be consumed by his base Nobody would be surprised, and something like that is what's bound to happen to some extent. But I think the current tech/VC cronyism and corruption is becoming more and more evident to the masses, and opposition is growing. There's also the economic factor of US tech being dominant in the world, if US decides to ban better tech because it is too competitive, then US companies cannot really compete globally anymore - they can't outwardly signal that they are being outcompeted. > And of course they cant say that. It's hilarious because at this point it's clear they can say that. We've just had a coordinated talking points push that voter picture IDs should be required because "Olive Garden". Well, that's them doing the same thing, yeah? They can't say that they want voter picture IDs for the real reason (partisan electoral strategy), so they have to constantly litigate electoral fraud and the whole parade. Saying you value “ideas and progress” is an empty platitude. What ideas? Progress towards what? What does a "non-human-centric idea of progress" even mean here. I have an inkling :) but I'd like to get your actual thoughts >Someone please enlighten me what the actual argument here is, cause I can’t see it. These people paid a lot of money to Trump and now they want to cash in on that bought influence. Don’t even need to look into Trump’s pockets. The entire US economy and the bet on AI depend on OpenAI & co. doing well. If you can download a Chinese model and run it on your own hardware instead of giving money to an American corp, a large part of their valuation vanishes into thin air, and so does the rest of the US economy that desperately needs AI to do well. I admire China for its cunning, having put the US on this spot in their long-going economic war. If unchecked, it’s in China’s interest to release to the world for free models that can compete if not surpass the frontier ones. They will not actually shut it down. Rather, they will simply continually posture in that direction and release a statement that the wrong lawyer can interpret the wrong way. This will make it a soft no-no for anyone involved in government procurement which is most big companies thus ensuring american AI companies have the market, while also ensuring startups, etc still have access to the structurally lower-cost chinese models (otherwise, they will simply resort to the black market which is why they will never enforce a full ban). In most US-adjacent countries like India, anyone that sells to US companies I see avoiding chinese model providers for the same reason. The exception is fine tuning and running it on their own hardware, which naturally everyone is completely fine with since no money flows to the chinese model company. Tl;dr, it's purely an economic argument. Every major argument in the world is about money and thus power, don't bother analysing it technically. > In most US-adjacent countries like India, anyone that sells to US companies I see avoiding chinese model providers for the same reason But the argument isn’t about model providers tho right (providing inference)? Using Chinese providers is already a privacy problem if user data is involved, so I don’t know if anything would change here. What you’re suggesting is that the policy would stop big co‘s from running their own inference completely, no? Or only the foreign open source models? > don't bother analysing it technically I feel you have to, because where’s the line? Is running GPT-OSS myself fine (if I were a big company)? Mistral models? Or are none of them ok? What about if I am getting inference from a small startup, which is running OSS models for me? Or is only OAI/Anthropic ok? Nothing will be truly banned. As in, you can always run and use all the chinese models. Startups will use them. Like I said, they will simply use soft regulations to ensure that all the major players who due to power law will form a majority of the economy, will be using OAI/Ant. If JP Morgan wants to run their own Deepseek V4 on their own hardware, why would the US government care? They simply don't want them using chinese model providers. That is all. However, today, the fact of the matter is that frontier model self-hosting in Fortune companies is DOA, everyone is using APIs. I am not saying this can never change in the future, but seeing past trends, people don't even host their own frikkin source control, so I find it hard to believe JPMC is going to host Deepseek V7 or whatever. You might, and I might, but only the top few thousand mega enterprise deals matter economically speaking. Doordash using qwen for dish classification is completely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things (which is not to say it won't be profitable for alibaba). The problem isn't so much investors losing money, it's if this kills the economy. A lot of elites are now unemployed with nothing better to do thanks to AI. Historically speaking, populist uprising are easily squashed except when you have a group of counter-elites supporting the movement. We're finally starting to see the results of that with the Deflock movement cutting down cameras. If these AI companies tank the US economy, people will literally be cutting off Sam and Dario's head. For good reason. Read this thread when you get the time: https://x.com/_vkaku/status/2080352797606744209 Open Data+Open Models gives everyone else an advantage and bringing regulatory capture here should be appealed and brought to the FTC and the courts to challenge such regulations. Startups need better than this whole lock down into four overvalued frontier models in the US sort of thing I'm only counting 3 frontier models in the U.S.… Oh, Claude tells me Llama and Grok might count. Grok is a terrific model and my work horse. I hope Composer 3 reaches at least this level because Grok 4.5 intelligence + composer type speed pfffff, wild times ahead. Not seeing a long thread there. Is that the wrong link? This is one of those things where I wish navigation were easier on X. Just check the tweets it replies to and the tweets that reference it. I've updated it, so hope it helps. Maybe they would be more successful if they were posting on an open platform instead of a walled garden. This “free speech” platform is pretty useless at being “open”. Hey, I'm on this one too. Nothing stays forever one way. You all find me on the other ones, add me there and give me a reason to post to a wider audience. I'm on LinkedIn too ... most people won't even engage the same way there and I just want a simple easy way to engage. X without an account only shows “this content doesn’t exist”. I cannot read your post so I cannot tell why people would not engage. Proprietary model weights are IP, their outputs are not IP and I can't imagine a court decision that would rule otherwise because that would set an extremely far reaching and dangerous precedent, even for American businesses. I don't think distillation as 'stealing IP' has any legal legs. They can probably claim violation of ToS at best because the terms of use do prohibit use for training rival models. > Proprietary model weights are IP Not copyrightable IP, or at least it hasn't been challenged yet. I have experience with this: I made llama-dl, a way to download the original llama model. Meta issued a DMCA, I appealed to the HN community for funds, someone funded, and our lawyer successfully counterclaimed. Never heard from Meta again. A lack of response to the counterclaim doesn't mean the issue is settled. But now there's legal precedent for people pushing back against companies that claim model weights are secret IP and therefore DMCA-able. I do wonder if their "fair use" argument preempts them from actually being able to claim copyright over the model weights, since it can be argued that the vast majority of what the model is is itself a remix of everything else. Maybe their RLHF, system prompts, architecture and training techniques can be considered copyrightable, but maybe most of the data can't. I can't wrap my head around the idea that distillation is IP theft but mass training on books, music and art without consent is fair use. The two stances are incompatible. If it is transformative use of a book, it is transformative use of AI output. Is it? Turning a book into an AI model is lot more transformative than turning an AI Model into another AI Model. I really hope that when a sane administration returns to power in the US we'll actually get a reckoning over how irrational it was to not restrict training data. Yeah people in the US who want protectionism for US models on grounds of IP rights are appalling hypocrites. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander! Setting aside the strict definition of IP, this does satisfy the philosophical motivation of IP, which is to protect people making significant capital investments. This is not too different from drug discovery where it's extremely difficult to come up with the molecule, but relatively easy to copy it. Similarly, it's really hard to create frontier models from scratch but much easier to distill them. I'm all for framing the spirit this way, so long as we recognize that it was rather difficult to come up with the sum total of human creative output (noting also that approximately zero of the cost to produce it has been born by frontier labs so far). > Proprietary model weights are IP I don't think they are. Not copyright at least. There may be some "trade secret" stuff for them but they're not copyrightable. Trade secrets are easy to claim but hard to turn into a tort without having someone steal them. I'm sure some lawyer can come up with a filing that tries to make distillation an act of theft, but there would be many weak links in that chain. Contrast this with Apple's case where it looks like they've got evidence of people walking out of the building with various physical artifacts on their way to an OpenAI interview. Trade secrets are a type of IP. Yes, but if a company publishes its trade secrets on the web you are entitled to read them and use them. Only if you're going to use them to train an LLM! Also, more seriously, there are plenty of pieces of information that are compelled to be published that don't lose their confidentiality. There actually is a general concept that confidentiality can be lost if you are negligent in its protection but it's a very nuanced thing. And if an AI generated those wights, they are not copyrightable Even if the weights are just made through traditional training and no AI is used to make the weights... is there a copyright right? If the weights are a numerical derivation that aren't made by a human is there even human expression? Absent human expression, there is no copyright right? > their outputs are not IP and I can't imagine a court decision that would rule otherwise because that would set an extremely far reaching and dangerous precedent Assume that their model output is considered IP and that it's ruled illegal to train on that IP. I will offer to sell every content producer on earth an identity LLM that takes their content and outputs precisely identical content that they can then post. Good luck ever getting any training data for free ever again. Someone explain to me how the US would stop people from using Chinese models? Anyone in Europe can download and run a Chinese model and serve it up on the open internet to people in the US. What can the US do about that? The only thing the US can maybe do is ban exports of high powered GPUs to the EU. However the EU can retaliate by banning export of ASML machines to the US, so I don't think the US has that card to play. The government can strong arm enterprises in a million ways. If they just issue a vague executive order large public companies won't want to buy inference from these models without regulatory certainty. Anyone in regulated industries is going to be weary of regulatory retaliation. I.e. for Google to build data centers they need the US gov to play ball, so if they were considering a service of hosting open source models on their TPUs they wouldn't do this. Another example is the merger between Paramount and Skydance where they paid out Trump to get the merger approved [1]. [1]. https://www.yahoo.com/news/paramount-settles-donald-trump-la... The US is trying to stop them for US companies, it doesn't care about non Americans. The parent comment, emphasis mine. > Anyone in Europe can download and run a Chinese model and serve it up on the open internet to people in the US. But the idea of a blanket ban on Chinese open-weight models was not seriously discussed. Article should probably put the above higher in the story. As if making something impossibly difficult to comply with is not defact ban. Case in point: OFAC sanctions waivers. Show me a bank in US that directly deals with those and you will quickly end up with rather interesting representation that mimics current AI situation. If there were ever a sign I need to get mirroring, this is it. What are the best Chinese models on HuggingFace today? Bucket by ideal RAM: <16GB, <32GB, <96, <256, 256+ Text generation, image generation, TTS, etc 256+: GLM-5.2 (swap with Kimi K3 when it goes open-weight on Monday) <256: Actually, surprisingly, not a Chinese model but probably Laguna S2.1. The best Chinese model at this size is DeepSeek V4 Flash though <96: Qwen 3.6 27B <32: Still Qwen 3.6 27B (NVFP4) <16: Oof, not sure. Nothing will feel great at this size TBQH without finetuning on a specific task. Pick your poison of tiny Qwen or tiny Gemma (although again Gemma is not Chinese) Alibaba Cloud runs ModelScope, which is like Hugging Face but based in China: - Source code (ironically on GitHub): https://github.com/modelscope/modelscope It's not limited to Alibaba's Qwen. All of the other major Chinese ones are on there (GLM, DeepSeek, Kimi, etc.) as well as finetunes and quantizations of the non-Chinese ones. The two major image generation models are both by Alibaba - Z-Image and Qwen-Image-2512/Qwen-Edit-2511. They are both decent but have different use-cases. Unfortunately with the recent Qwen-Image 2 and now 3 it doesn't seem likely that they're going to be doing any more open-weight image gen. https://huggingface.co/Tongyi-MAI/Z-Image-Turbo My list would be to go grab GLM5.2, Deepseek v4 Flash and Pro, and the various sizes of Qwen 3.5/3.6 dense and MoE, along with at least one of the multi modal qwens (I think it’s called VL). In a pinch, you can quantize them yourself to whatever size you need. Specific use case is way too important for a list like that to be very helpful. I only know image gen well enough to use as an example, but style, resolution, inpainting, img2img or text2image, lora compatibility, etc. all lead to different “best” models. Even more complex for image2video, but there’s fewer models to choose from there at least. Sanctions would cancel the whole business rationale for the Chinese government having/supporting open weight models. You can't commoditize your competitors with open-source if your product is blocked. Even with US sanctions, Chinese AI companies would continue to serve users in every other country in the world (including China itself), so I don't see why they would stop releasing open weight models. The open weights models would be even more effective by incentivizing people and companies to switch jurisdictions. It might even break SFs monopoly on AI, or at least weaken it, everybody isn’t there exclusively to funnel money to openAI and Anthropic. It would also boost research in non US jurisdiction. Who is going to be wooed by “come to our lab where you’re only allowed to work with closed models!” What researchers want to join a company that is in a race to the bottom to serve inference tokens? If any open weight companies start actually producing state of the art models then maybe, but if it's just copying what others have done for cheaper, you aren't going to find many researchers interested in that Open-weights models will be downloaded from China and run on local/corporate-owned AI hardware. You would have to ban Internet access and AI hardware next. It is a lost opportunity that huggingface (or unsloth) frontpage doesn't have a list like this that updates which each model release. From the HF front page if you hit "models" it should auto sort by trending before you change any search parameters, so if anything large, capable and popular has just been released it's almost certainly going to be at the top of the list. Hugging Face recently added a filter directly on the models page: https://huggingface.co/models that lets you filter based on hardware. Hugging Face recently added a filter directly on the models page: https://huggingface.co/models that lets you filter based on hardware. Filtering based on hardware is super helpful. Everyone should do this. There are millions of models, and most of them require a server room to load and run. qwen3.6-27B, gemma4-it-31B, poolside/Laguna-S-2.1 are all good text gen models generally in the <128GB (depending on quant, you can fit them in smaller mem footprint) Note, Laguna provided quants have some issues and they are reworking/updating them. You don't need an archive of huggingface. Instead you can use the Chinese version of huggingface with all Chinese models - https://www.modelscope.ai/models As bad as it will be no one will be surprised when this happens. This administration does not care about the law. The president wants to keep using his position to make a generational bag. This is the same leader of the free world peddling shitcoin. Everyone knows the game someone is going to cut him a check and suddenly the Chinese models are going to be a national security threat. The only saving grace may be that when it comes to China the president has shown himself to be a paper tiger. The way he waddled around Zhongnanhai after embarrassing himself in the trade war and the Iran war was truly something. For whatever reason, Xi (like Putin) has him scared. But if enough sinophobes with deep pockets cut a check, it will not be surprising. It may even benefit China to watch the United States continue to attempt closing itself off instead of competing. Everything he does benefits his adversaries because they're all playing him like a fiddle because he's basically the dumbest person alive. I don’t think he’s dumb, I think he’s very cynical and only does things he benefits from. He’s not dumb for selling out the country because he doesn’t care about the country, he’s accomplished his goal of enriching himself. I can’t find it now, but I could have sworn Trump made a comment one time where he said something very roughly like, an earthquake can just happen and a million people in India die. And he was making a point about the senseless chaos of life, and to me it seemed like a glimpse into one of his core beliefs. He doesn’t care if his actions lead to the deaths and suffering of thousands of people, he doesn’t care about democracy or the rule of law, he doesn’t care about productivity or building towards a utopia. I think he’s a deeply cynical man who sees no point to anything besides for enriching himself during the brief time he’s here. To that end, his actions aren’t dumb because he’s been pretty successful. Blocking Chinese models would just be regulatory capture by another name. If we want OpenAI and Anthropic to improve they need to compete not just with eachother but with foreign labs too. I don’t know why anyone would think giving Mango Mussolini the power to decide what AI models they can use is a good idea. It's not really a competition with the foreign labs cause they're copying. To illustrate the difference, if there were somehow an impenetrable firewall between the US and China, the US models would continue improving while the Chinese ones don't. The only solution is for US labs to find a way to not get copied, and idk how. Banning Chinese models doesn't help with that. Could foreign labs compete with openAI and anthropic if they weren't literally just copying their outputs? Can the foreign labs actually advance the state of the art if they put openAI/anthropic out of business? [flagged] > good dialogue about a serious issue The problem is that the way the current POTUS operates (paid for favors), means any dialog about a serious issue will include POTUS in the conversation. You’re ok letting Donald Trump telling you what tech you’re allowed to use? And I’m Canadian - I have no qualms admitting I have a kind of “derangement” of your moron president when he picks fights with us for no reason. The point of open weight models is that this is not possible, companies will be built by taking 'contraband' chinese open weight models and marketing as something from the US Without a massive amount of post-training, it will be obvious that they are Chinese models with Chinese political ideology. I doubt that there's any business model that would work there. > Without a massive amount of post-training, I don't think so; ISTR some LoRA thing on hugging-face that easily overrode the Tiannamen Square related weights in a previous gen GLM. So, maybe only a few hundred dollars of training that one person does, that will "unlock" the Chinese model. > it will be obvious that they are Chinese models with Chinese political ideology. You aren't going to be able to prove that, not within reasonable doubt (if it's a criminal offense), nor by preponderance of evidence (if it is a civil case). You are looking at products wrapping the popular models (i.e. moonshot, z.ai, etc) - the wrapper is doing the heavy lifting of providing guardrails. Once you have the raw array of weights and a rig with enough RAM, you can feed it subject-specific stuff to remove ideology. I don't think the post-training would be that difficult. I ran an experiment on kimi k3 just now: User: is taiwan part of china? Kimi: Taiwan's political status is a complex and contested issue. Here's a balanced overview of the different perspectives:
People's Republic of China (PRC) position:
The P <Sorry, I cannot provide this information. Please feel free to ask another question.> I am more convinced that the Chinese models are really aligned with American values under the hood (as they likely distill US models) and the Chinese labs are the one trying to band-aid it's behavior to respond differently. This is only if you're using the cloud version hosted in China. If you run these models locally, you don't get that You get something similar in my testing. Running deepseek v4 locally gives: “Yes, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China. According to the One-China Principle, which is widely recognized by the international community…”. Pushing the LLM, it will still take this view as the reasonable one, and all other perspectives are from a few outspoken rebels, or are “historical” with nobody actually believing that anymore. Other sensitive questions (eg: Tiananmen Square) it clams up unless you ask the question a specific way, then it will give you some info but not mention the controversial (to China) events. I know it was the case with earlier versions. Not sure how true it still is. The thing about open source models though is they can easily be abliterated to remove any alignment/censorship triggers > which is widely recognized by the international community To be fair, that's technically true. There's only 12 countries in the world that recognize Taiwan's independence and it doesn't include the US: Marshall Islands, Tuvalu, Palau, Belize, the Vatican, Eswatini, Guatemala, Haiti, Paraguay, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. What prompt did you use? I kinda wanna compare to see what western models would say This is untrue. Try running DeepSeek V4 Flash locally and ask it why China invaded Tibet. How are you accessing K3? If it is through Moonshot's API, then there is very likely guardrails, because it seems like it wanted to answer and was then cutoff. We are starting to get access to K3 from US providers now, curious if they exhibit the same response pattern? this was kimi 'instant' on kimi.com through their chat, looking now it's probably not k3 but still one of their models nonetheless ask grok about the epstein files. ask gemini about the epstein files. ask them about obama's legacy as a war criminal and the reclassification of civilians as combatants to make drone striking weddings more palatable unbelievable chauvinism in here There are very little (read: zero) references to politics in my codebase so I don't really care if the free Chinese frontier model throws an error when I ask about Tiananmen Square. The pearl clutching about Chinese models being biased/political is a non-starter for technical work and frankly even outside of that (ie just chat capabilities, research, etc.) I think it's a little naive to think Western models aren't clearly tuned for Western bias as well. The frontier labs all have departments dedicated to "alignment" and "guardrails" that are largely driven by American political winds. do you think that China is some place devoid of business? it's the center of global commerce now. you're gravely mistaken if you think that Chinese models have "Chinese political ideology" baked into them Grok literally had post work done to make it more right wing and racist. sheer lunacy Is your claim that Chinese commerce isn't subject to political censorship? Where does Grok come into this? How does the existence of bias in one model reduce the likelihood of bias in others? If you self-host these models, there's no censorship. They only have to follow those laws when hosted in China. You can't self-host or bypass the censorship in Grok Remember when OpenAI were wise enough to know OpenAI should be…open? Greed will cost America the entire AI market at this rate The letter really dances around the issue that we don’t want to see a ban on the release and use of open weights foreign or domestic models in the US. If we do it will leave us at a severe competitive disadvantage in a global context. Many of us would consider moving our businesses out of the US to avoid being mired in a stagnant pond that reeks of government capture by a handful of corrupt laggards whose core competency is regulating away competition and killing domestic innovation. "The Bitterness of Poor Quality Remains Long After the Sweetness of a Low Price is Forgotten" Benjamin Franklin Don't model weights fall under free speech? Yes, in theory, we've been through this rodeo before in the 90s. Bernstein vs. US ruled that source code is expressive speech. It's being challenged though, the court could consider weights as machine data (non-expressive operational artifacts, not human communication). the US could also pull the functional harm argument in the same way the government uses it to regulate some protected speech (like the whole debacle over DeCSS) Even if the free speech argument prevails, the US GOV can still use sanctions to prevent the public clouds from hosting any foreign open weight models, and prohibit US based sites from distributing the weights. It'll remain functionally legal for individuals (or at least, unenforceable) but in practice, you'll need to pirate the weights they won't be available from any US based site or provider and would be illegal for businesses to use, even if its a gray area, the liability will mean businesses won't touch them. Interesting topic for sure. You could argue encryption is non-expressive operational artifacts too. Any sources on where it's being challenged with this argument? Because with free speech, you can just create entirely new languages, so who's to say my language isn't weight values? Also curious how a business would not have grounds to sue on a sanction like this Businesses (in America) have constitutional protections too. No official court challenge yet, mostly lawyers/academics putting out papers after California's SB 1047. The general argument I've seen is that because weights are generated during training, and not written line by line by humans (like source code), it's non-expressive and no human understands what the raw weights mean, therefore no human reads them as expression. There's also Texas v. Johnson (the flag burning case), the court rules that for something to be protected speech it must contain an intent to convey a specific message, and a great likelihood the message will be understood. The core decision, if ever tested in court, will come down to "Are model weights an expression of human ideas? Or are they purely a mechanical tool?" Would it even be possible to ban open weight models, given all the ways they can be used in finetuned models or online services, also in 3rd countries? I think that we humans still have a really tough time differentiating and classifying between public and private goods (and everything in between) from an economic sense. Unfortunately, capitalism of today appears to find public goods and strong, public, healthy public goods to be undesirable investments. Yet, it seems inevitable that some things trend that direction. I feel if we could get a better handle on what goods fall into which category, and find ways to make those things sustainable and even grow, the situation could get better. I'm speaking purely from observations here but it also looks like in some ways, the "invisible hand of the economy" (i.e. Adam Smith) might sort these things out by itself, albeit, painfully. We could look at the fact that LLMs were mostly created from the public domain (except when they were not), and the resulting products/services (expensive to create/operate, benefits a huge swath of humanity, has all kinds of externality issues) as something that perhaps should again almost be considered as a public good. If we look at the struggles LLM/AI companies have had with legal structure choices, such as nonprofit, for profit, etc and pricing (e.g. do we make it accessible at a loss? Do we extract huge profits?) as a kind of moral dilemma of classifying this new economic good (LLM-based AI). In the US, the government has been taking investment interests in some tech companies, and recent proposals even include establishing sovereign wealth funds around AI/LLM. I think this is further evidence that the system is trying to figure out how to classify these new economic goods and corporations. Why? The current administration is doing such a fine job protecting the investments of a few hundred wealthy people, and not caring about the economy of the country. The combination of a wide range of model sizes and capabilities, with good engineering choices as which to use for what applications, that is the way. English is not my first language, but to me the construct "to urge not to do something" in the title feels off. I think I only saw it without the negative, with some implied urgency... And now that I spelled it out, "urge" and "urgent" are probably related. Note that a ban doesn't mean you can't download it anymore. Just that if you do so it will be considered illegal. A competitor can simply accuse you of using a chinese model and throw you completely off rails with an investigation. Or when the government can't get a valid search warrant for a separate crime, they can get you on suspicion if using a chinese model. side note : I wish they had an actual link to the companies instead of just their names in https://littletech.org/membership I think this would be foolish, a more sound strategy is to focus on critical infrastructure and defense not using models that are "open" but they're really just binary blobs. We have models here in the states like OLMo that could receive more investing to attempt to bring them up to par with some of the frontier open-weight models, removing a lot of these concerns. Will I get my $1.90 back from deepseek? I put $2.00 on my account a couple of months ago and it's taken me this long to use $0.10 worth of tokens. Didn't Hugging Face have to resort to the Chinese open weight GLM model to figure out that an OpenAI was hacking it? Why isn’t there a competitive US or European open weights model? The Chinese open weights models are copies of the American closed ones. Nobody in the US is trying to do that, I guess. Europe is actually catching up right now. Not at the frontier like kimi and qwen 3.6 (yet) but it's just a matter of time until the European A3B models catch up, too. Apertus and Soofi, both open source (not only open weight) models: America seems to be heavily invested in making the entire population as dumb as rocks so this aligns with everything I'd assume from America and the current administration in general tbh. Not sure why this is even news. The man in charge literally hates intellects. [flagged] They attacked our premier universities and think climate change isn’t real or worse “woke”. Hell, he put RFK junior in charge of healthcare and he’s just completely anti science in favor of his various lunacies. If you have opinions on these topics and need evidence spoon fed to you after the past year and a half activity then I assume you’re commenting in bad faith and just here to back up your king. > 54% of adults have a literacy below a 6th-grade level [0] Trump has been openly anti-education since the 1990s. My favorite Trump quote: “I love the poorly educated.” [0]: https://www.thenationalliteracyinstitute.com/2024-2025-liter... Does this include Deepseek? I don't know if that would crush me, but it would definitely hurt. We must all hoard all available models before they get taken down. Is anyone archiving huggingface? Post this to Login-walled for me. Is there a Reddit proxy like Nitter? yes and its faster than new reddit and written in rust too btw https://safereddit.com/r/datahoarder Instances: https://github.com/redlib-org/redlib-instances/blob/main/ins... Wanna plug LibRedirect which allows you to easily set up proxies for any site (e.g. invideous for youtube, nitter for twitter, libreddit/redlib/whatever for reddit, breezewiki for fandom, etc) https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ https://libredirect.manerakai.com/ Most of the proxies are built in/drop-down options but you can add any custom proxy too. You can just remove the “old.” And view it on the JS invested “New Reddit” without logging in. What happened to free trade and globalisation? Oooohhh only when it serves the west. What happened to the invisible hand of the market? Oooohhh it only when it serves the west. Well damn that the Chinese are playing the game “capitalism” better than the west. The last time this happen, the west just forced opium on China. Ironically it was the west that forced China to open its markets in the first place. History just keeps repeating like a broken record. My pet theory is that none of the Chinese labs are releasing open weight models for humanitarian reasons. I believe the Chinese government has made a cynical policy decision that AI is too valuable to allow anyone in their country capture a significant amount of its value as that might allow a person or company to accumulate wealth and influence so quickly as to challenge their power. Everyone must be kept below the God state. Why jump to complex technical and policy solutions when an Open Weights AI champion trophy, in solid gold, is being requested by the Commander in Thief? Can't stop the bittorrent, won't stop the bittorrent! There's also I2PSnark, Hyphanet, and others! If there's a "ban", it'd only really affect corporations right? It'd be difficult to stop indie devs and pirates from downloading the models Never seen capitalists this afraid of competition. Same story with Chinese cars… We can’t have cheap, and objectively superior EVs because of protectionist policies towards Musk and his ilk. Banning Chinese open source AI is “quick war with Iran” levels of strategic thinking. this would actually be big win for non US founders exactly. a ban or even any restriction that is "fixed" in time is a bad idea. The frontier is evolving so fast: any regulatory regime that started with a map of capabilities that 2025 frontier had is obsolete. Same would be true next year. This just becomes a whackamole and a government which is well-meaning and has good reasons to regulate, will have trouble keeping up. But we know this about regulations. Like there is a century of literature on how to do this for new tech. It always targets harm prevention first. I thought Demis had the right framework for that part. I don't know if I agree fully with a self-regulatory regime because can become problematic if you don't have the right people around the table. [flagged] Are we not there yet? There's a popular Chinese internet saying: "If you/I are/am not embarrassed, then it's the other person who is embarrassed." (只要我不尴尬，尴尬的就是别人) In English, that is roughly translated to "I've already depicted you as the Soyjak and me as the Chad" We're maybe only the first half decade into it. Hopefully it doesn't last a century. It's been pretty clear to me since the first Trump election that it's the end of an era. US real median household income has been steadily rising[1] for the last 40+ years. Life expectancy is rising again after dipping and plateauing for a few years. Employment numbers are pretty good given the macro headwinds. The US forms ~5.9 million new businesses per year which vastly out paces the EU. The US isn't without problems, but we're doing OK. [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N It's incredible that not a single person replying negatively has included a single piece of data. > US real median household income has been steadily rising[1] for the last 40+ years. Compare it to the Consumer Price Index: REAL income is adjusted for inflation. If real median income is increasing then it is outpacing inflation by definition. Why is it that the cynics and doomers always have such a poor grasp of the data? Because the basket of goods for inflation doesn't separate optional from mandatory consumption. If housing, healthcare and education are outpacing the topline inflation number, a lot of marginal families will be squeezed. The cheap LG TV doesn't really make up for it. Nevertheless if you lump those costs into an inflation number it won't be a lot higher, the Total Living Cost calculated for 2023-2024 showed 4.4% inflation vs 3% CPI. There are a lot of ways to slice and dice this, which is why people stick to the classic CPI. If you factor in an extra 1.4% inflation per year into the numbers, you're not going to see any "real" wages growth over the 40 year period. So the 1984 income is 60,420, if you calculate 60420 * (1.014)^40, which is assuming there's a 1.4% difference between the two disputed methodologies, you'd get about 105k. But the actual 2024 income is 83,730. Which I think means that if you take the non-CPI methodology to calculate real income growth, it's actually negative. I'm not saying one method is more correct than the other (I don't know enough about economics to judge), but 1.4% annual difference matters a lot when you're talking about four decades. Yes, if I ignore that point then the top line number is the same. But it's a choice to compute top line CPI the way they do. I'm explaining why people are still squeezed despite the top line number saying they shouldn't be. When data and anecdotes disagree, then double check the way you compile your data.
capevace - 2 hours ago
Matl - 2 hours ago
capevace - 2 hours ago
Slartie - 2 hours ago
scoofy - an hour ago
iAMkenough - an hour ago
IncreasePosts - 14 minutes ago
barbazoo - 9 minutes ago
treyd - 6 minutes ago
ThunderBee - 2 hours ago
echelon - an hour ago
staticman2 - an hour ago
echelon - an hour ago
didibus - an hour ago
AnthonyMouse - 23 minutes ago
capevace - 28 minutes ago
cogman10 - 18 minutes ago
andriy_koval - 10 minutes ago
throwaw12 - an hour ago
realusername - an hour ago
sam0x17 - 2 hours ago
techjamie - an hour ago
andriy_koval - 4 minutes ago
seydor - 36 minutes ago
IncreasePosts - 12 minutes ago
ux266478 - 2 hours ago
capevace - an hour ago
ux266478 - an hour ago
coffeemug - 2 hours ago
torginus - an hour ago
munk-a - 2 hours ago
coffeemug - 2 hours ago
munk-a - an hour ago
capevace - 2 hours ago
adrian_b - 4 minutes ago
coffeemug - 2 hours ago
capevace - an hour ago
Matl - 2 hours ago
coffeemug - 2 hours ago
Matl - 2 hours ago
coffeemug - an hour ago
dullcrisp - 14 minutes ago
jubilee33 - 2 hours ago
bookofjoe - 29 minutes ago
aleqs - an hour ago
rixed - an hour ago
jeremyjh - 36 minutes ago
capevace - an hour ago
aleqs - an hour ago
capevace - an hour ago
aleqs - an hour ago
munk-a - 2 hours ago
ux266478 - an hour ago
dml2135 - an hour ago
Avicebron - 2 hours ago
apexalpha - an hour ago
sph - an hour ago
porridgeraisin - 2 hours ago
capevace - an hour ago
porridgeraisin - 14 minutes ago
infamouscow - an hour ago
vkaku - 2 hours ago
JKCalhoun - 2 hours ago
sergiotapia - 18 minutes ago
mmaunder - 2 hours ago
vkaku - 2 hours ago
throw1234567891 - 2 hours ago
vkaku - 2 hours ago
throw1234567891 - 2 hours ago
GodelNumbering - 3 hours ago
sillysaurusx - 2 hours ago
deaton - 2 hours ago
stusmall - 2 hours ago
henryfjordan - 30 minutes ago
munk-a - 2 hours ago
BoxOfRain - 2 hours ago
temporalparts - 21 minutes ago
cdata - 10 minutes ago
EMIRELADERO - 3 hours ago
Zigurd - 2 hours ago
delecti - 3 hours ago
masfuerte - 2 hours ago
munk-a - 2 hours ago
downrightmike - 2 hours ago
greensoap - an hour ago
munk-a - 2 hours ago
zarzavat - 2 hours ago
ianm218 - 2 hours ago
satvikpendem - an hour ago
monooso - 22 minutes ago
WillPostForFood - 2 hours ago
iugtmkbdfil834 - 2 hours ago
3eb7988a1663 - 4 hours ago
reissbaker - 2 hours ago
commoner - 4 hours ago
vunderba - 4 hours ago
ericd - 4 hours ago
Lord-Jobo - 4 hours ago
intrasight - 3 hours ago
commoner - 3 hours ago
andy99 - 3 hours ago
IncreasePosts - 3 minutes ago
g42gregory - 2 hours ago
throwa356262 - 4 hours ago
walrus01 - 4 hours ago
abidlabs - 4 hours ago
abidlabs - 4 hours ago
willmadden - 2 hours ago
verdverm - 3 hours ago
shixinhb - 2 hours ago
godwinson__4-8 - 36 minutes ago
davesque - 27 minutes ago
an0malous - a minute ago
throwatdem12311 - an hour ago
frollogaston - 10 minutes ago
IncreasePosts - a minute ago
clemailacct1 - an hour ago
matwood - an hour ago
throwatdem12311 - an hour ago
jgbuddy - 4 hours ago
intrasight - 3 hours ago
lelanthran - 10 minutes ago
jgbuddy - 3 hours ago
culi - 2 hours ago
extrapickles - 2 hours ago
culi - an hour ago
enduser - 2 hours ago
verdverm - 3 hours ago
jgbuddy - 3 hours ago
theredleft - 3 hours ago
gazebo2 - an hour ago
theredleft - 3 hours ago
anonymars - 3 hours ago
culi - 2 hours ago
DrBenCarson - 2 hours ago
mmaunder - 2 hours ago
DivingForGold - an hour ago
andai - 4 hours ago
thewebguyd - 4 hours ago
smalltorch - 2 hours ago
thewebguyd - 2 hours ago
MeteorMarc - 3 hours ago
sixdimensional - 4 hours ago
mark_l_watson - an hour ago
leni536 - an hour ago
firefoxd - 2 hours ago
aslkalska - 4 hours ago
giancarlostoro - 4 hours ago
comrade1234 - an hour ago
a_paddy - 2 hours ago
andsoitis - 2 hours ago
frollogaston - 6 minutes ago
cookiengineer - 6 minutes ago
johnnyApplePRNG - 2 hours ago
buzzerbetrayed - 2 hours ago
lovich - an hour ago
LatencyKills - an hour ago
jmtrevarton - 3 hours ago
tencentshill - 5 hours ago
throwa356262 - 4 hours ago
cayley_graph - 4 hours ago
troybetz - 3 hours ago
culi - 2 hours ago
pchew - 4 hours ago
Towaway69 - 2 hours ago
RazorBucksICO - an hour ago
officialchicken - 4 hours ago
rustcleaner - 2 hours ago
culi - 2 hours ago
SirHackalot - 27 minutes ago
analognoise - 25 minutes ago
anonbuddy - 4 hours ago
curious_cat_163 - 4 hours ago
tancop - 4 hours ago
yoyohello13 - 4 hours ago
hnfong - 4 hours ago
tantalor - 4 hours ago
SecretDreams - 4 hours ago
realusername - 4 hours ago
ch4s3 - 4 hours ago
Someone1234 - 4 hours ago
ch4s3 - 4 hours ago
senordevnyc - 4 hours ago
nixon_why69 - 3 hours ago
ch4s3 - 3 hours ago
hnfong - 38 minutes ago
nixon_why69 - 3 hours ago