It's obviously true that DeepSeek models are biased about topics sensitive to the Chinese government, like Tiananmen Square: they refuse to answer questions related to Tiananmen. That didn't magically fall out of a "predict the next token" base model (of which there is plenty of training data for it to complete the next token accurately); that came out of specific post-training to censor the topic.

It's also true that Anthropic and OpenAI have post-training that censors politically charged topics relevant to the United States. I'm just surprised you'd deny DeepSeek does the same for China when it's quite obvious that they do.

What data you include, or leave out, biases the model; and there's obviously also synthetic data injected into training to influence it on purpose. Everyone does it: DeepSeek is neither a saint nor a sinner.

Well said, except for the last sentence:

Just because everyone does it doesn’t mean one isn’t a sinner for doing it.

All I'm saying is that if you want to hear your own propaganda, use your own state approved AI. Deepseek is obviously going to respond according to their own regulatory environment.

Pretty sure they're asking for the narrative that's widely known about everywhere _except_ by the er... non-leadership people of China.

I read a lot. I'm not saying nobody died at Tiananmen, but framing it as a massacre is specifically a US/NATO narrative.

I really hate the way people like you talk about "narratives". I care about facts. Are denying it was a massacre? How many people do you think were killed?

Depends on who you ask! That's what I mean by "narratives". There's plenty of corroborating evidence that there was a large demonstration and riots. After that it gets hazy because different officials are claiming fatalities and casualties as high as 10k and as low as 300 all with differing ratios of soldier and student casualties. Wouldn't the numbers and/or ratios be similar if they were looking at the same facts?

Obviously the CCP is going to lie about how many of their own people they massacred.

I dunno, the US routinely just states plainly how many people they massacre and folks in the US seem okay with it.

I'd assume that when the Chinese do bad things people in China feel the same way about that as folks in the US feel about the US doing evil stuff, which is to say "very little at all". Why would they need to lie, any more than the US needs to lie? Do the average Chinese folks have more conscience then the average US citizen?

"the US routinely just states plainly how many people they massacre and folks in the US seem okay with it."

What a nonsensical thing to say. The CCP ruthlessly sensors all discussion of the massacre and every LLM created in China sensors it. So stop it with the BS whataboutism

I'm saying there's a massive disagreement both among western sources and between western sources and Chinese sources. The disagreement among western sources is what makes their reporting look made up. I'm not saying I believe what China has reported.

I recently learned about the (ancient?) greek concept of amathia. It's a willful ignorance, often cultivated as a preference for identity and ego over learning. It's not about a lack of intelligence, but rather a willful pattern of subverting learning in favor of cult and ideology.