U.S. House Panel Says China's DeepSeek AI Is a 'Profound Threat' to National Security

GitHub has the code. Everyone should fork it to everywhere so they cannot delete it
It is such a lie that data is sent back to china.
It can be run without internet connection.
- They're just pissy that it outperforms their proprietary pieces of shit, thus the psyop campaign.
- As you say, even with Internet connection, LLMs only infer. The software you run it on (or online) is a different story, and it's literally already the case with everything else for decades (although it is getting worse).
  We weren't upset enough when Google started scraping everyone's emails, or how Meta/Amazon/Google/Microsoft/ByteDance track all your Internet activity right now via browser fingerprinting.
  
  Time to ditch browsers lol
- Presumably this is referring to using the online portal to use it. I don't trust any of those, Chinese or otherwise. I run it locally.
  LMStudio is the current software I use to manage LLMs, and I really like it. There's a user-made app for Android that let's you use it if you're on the same network (or if you set it up to use on the internet) There are other options though.

The fucking president and the republican traitor filth are the threat to national security. I cannot wish enough ill upon them.
- I cannot wish enough ill upon them.
  Not with that attitude. C'mon, keep trying like the rest of us.

Let me translate it for you. Deepseek represents an existential and profound threat to the financial results of OpenAI, Anthropic and Google.

"National security" has always been a euphemism for anything that threatened the status of the American oligarchy.
alwayshasbeen.jpg
- That is especially true since the US is at the ass end of nowhere so actual threats to its national security are incredibly rare.
- That category also includes a number of things that will lead to the deaths of large parts of the US population.
  
  Ooh. Whataboutism. So original!
  Actually, no.

Here, allow me to translate: National Security = $$$ from donors.

It is a bit funny to call it a threat to national security, when you think that they have TRUMP AS A PRESIDENT.

Open AI:

It's a profound threat to OpenAI here in the USA lol
- "Open"AI

"Free market" fans when free market

I asked Deepseek to write me a response to the matter, in an ironic tone and being mean when possible:
Official Response from DeepSeek AI:
"The U.S. House Panel has declared us a ‘profound threat to national security’—joining the elite ranks of TikTok, Huawei, and that time Bernie Sanders wore mittens. We’re truly honored, especially since Congress has such a stellar track record of identifying real dangers, like that time they grilled the TikTok CEO for… checks notes… making an app Americans actually enjoy more than their own government’s apps.
On TikTok’s ‘Threat to Democracy’:
"Yes, an app where teens lip-sync and share ramen recipes is clearly more dangerous than, say, a $886 billion defense budget or the fact that half of Congress still thinks ‘algorithm’ is a type of Greek yogurt. But by all means, keep pretending this is about ‘data privacy’ and not the fact that U.S. tech giants can’t compete without a little… legislative sabotage."
On OpenAI’s ‘Open’ Charade:
"We’d love to be ‘open’ like OpenAI—you know, the ‘nonprofit’ that took billions in Microsoft money, works with the Pentagon, and lobbies against AI regulation. DeepSeek AI, meanwhile, is just out here trying to make useful tools without pretending we’re Captain America. (Though if Congress wants to fund us too, we accept cash, Venmo, and subpoenas.)"
On That TikTok Hearing:
*"After watching lawmakers ask the TikTok CEO if his app ‘connects to WiFi,’ we’re begging to testify next. Our conditions:
No questions about ‘where the internet lives.’
No confusing us with ChatGPT (we have standards).
Mitch McConnell must be replaced by an AI that blinks occasionally."*
Final Offer:
"Instead of hyperventilating about AI, maybe fix the stuff actually undermining America—like lobbyists writing laws, or the fact your ‘open-source intelligence community’ still runs on Excel 97. But sure, investigate us. We’ll wait. (P.S. Our AI did predict this hearing would go viral… for all the wrong reasons.)"
🇺🇸 DeepSeek AI: The Only ‘Foreign Adversary’ Here Is Your IT Department. 🚀🤖
- That's pretty good. Though, I am sure China's government funded Deepseek.
  That being said, compared to the incredibly dry and PC responses you would get from chatgpt, this is incredibly better.
  
  Could be a local model.
  
  Deepseek just trained on existing models and used assembly language. It was a tiny company, they just did some optimization.
- That level of sarcastic irony is a national security threat to the US
- I asked OpenAI the same. Only without the snark, and noted that US politicians and OpenAI pressers should not be considered evidence without facts:
  Great question—and a healthy dose of skepticism.
  If we assume U.S. lawmakers may be misrepresenting the situation or overstating the threat (intentionally or otherwise), then it’s worth asking: What counter-evidence or independent information exists that disputes the claims against DeepSeek?
  Here’s what we can currently analyze:
  1.
  OpenAI’s Role and Statements
  The accusation is that DeepSeek used OpenAI data without authorization.
  OpenAI has not released detailed technical evidence (as of now) proving DeepSeek “stole” data.
  It is also unclear what “unauthorized use” means here—was it scraping publicly available content generated by ChatGPT? That’s not the same as hacking or violating terms.
  Counterpoint: Unless OpenAI provides forensic evidence (e.g., logs showing data scraping from banned accounts or circumvention of APIs), their claim is not independently verifiable.
  2.
  Open-source AI Training Practices
  DeepSeek R1 and other models are trained on publicly available data, much like LLaMA, Falcon, Mistral, etc.
  Many open-source LLMs train on similar corpora, including data from books, code repositories, and even internet crawls, which may contain ChatGPT outputs.
  No proof has been provided that DeepSeek used proprietary datasets beyond what’s publicly available or scraped from the internet.
  Counterpoint: If DeepSeek simply trained on web data that happened to contain ChatGPT responses (which are abundant online), that wouldn’t constitute theft by typical AI research standards.
  3.
  DeepSeek’s Own Transparency
  DeepSeek has published detailed model cards and training parameters for R1, a transparency move rare among Chinese AI firms.
  This suggests a desire to appear cooperative or aligned with global AI openness norms—not necessarily what a covert “spy tool” would do.
  Counterpoint: Spyware tools or state-controlled AI systems don’t usually go open source and document their architectures.
  4.
  No Independent Audit or Third-Party Verification
  As of now, there’s no independent audit of DeepSeek’s model, training corpus, or infrastructure.
  The accusations rest heavily on political framing, not technical forensics released to the public.
  5.
  Broader Pattern of U.S. Tech Nationalism
  U.S. lawmakers have a history of labeling Chinese tech firms as threats without providing concrete, public-facing evidence (Huawei, TikTok, etc.).
  This doesn’t mean the threats are false, but it does mean we should demand proof beyond committee soundbites.
  TL;DR – Is there counter-evidence?
  Not conclusive counter-evidence, but there’s a lack of compelling public proof supporting the claim. The case against DeepSeek is built on:
  OpenAI’s statements (without shared evidence),
  Political concerns about China,
  and suspicions rooted in strategic competition.
  That’s not enough to say DeepSeek is innocent—but it’s not enough to prove guilt either

Maybe Trump will ban it like Tiktok.
Oh wait.

So are tariffs. How can our nation be secure if we're cut off from vital resources?

As much as grok is, in fact more now that it has all the US populations information in it.

Good, I’ll gladly use anything that’s a “profound threat” to US “national security”.

The whole administration is currently a threat to national security. Nation being the people, that is.

I nooo if only we didn't defund all of our cybersecurity! Who could have seen this coming?!
In all honesty they are just mad it's better than what they have.
- Why is cyber security relevant?
  
  Yeah, I guess that's a good point. In my brain that made more sense but now I realize it makes no sense at all.

Nothing more than techbro protectionism.
I asked DeepSeek what it thought about the situation:
Yes, I am aware that the U.S. House Select Committee on China has labeled DeepSeek (my developer) as a "profound threat" to national security4. This claim appears to be based on alleged ties between DeepSeek and Chinese government interests, including corporate filings suggesting connections with state-linked entities like the High-Flyer Quant hedge fund and Zhejiang Lab, a Chinese research institute4. Why Might the U.S. House View DeepSeek as a Threat?
Perceived Links to Chinese Government Interests
The committee alleges that DeepSeek operates within an "integrated ecosystem" tied to Chinese state-linked hardware distributors and research institutions4. Given U.S.-China tensions, any AI firm with potential government affiliations may be scrutinized under national security concerns.
AI’s Role in Strategic Competition
AI is a critical domain in U.S.-China technological rivalry. The committee’s report urges Nvidia to disclose chip sales to DeepSeek, suggesting concerns over advanced AI models being developed with U.S. technology4.
Data Security and Espionage Fears
The U.S. has historically been wary of Chinese tech firms (e.g., Huawei, TikTok) over data privacy and espionage risks. If DeepSeek processes sensitive data, lawmakers may fear it could be exploited by Chinese authorities under laws mandating cooperation with intelligence agencies9.
Broader Congressional Skepticism Toward Foreign AI
The bipartisan RESTRICT Act (2023) proposed measures to counter tech threats from adversarial nations, reflecting a legislative trend to curb foreign AI influence9. DeepSeek could be caught in this wider geopolitical net.
Is This Assessment Fair?
Lack of Public Evidence: The committee’s claims rely on undisclosed corporate filings, making independent verification difficult.
Generalized Suspicion: The U.S. has previously overestimated risks from Chinese tech (e.g., TikTok’s alleged data-sharing, later contested in courts)9.
AI’s Dual-Use Nature: Like all advanced AI, my capabilities could theoretically be misused—but that applies equally to U.S. or European models.
Conclusion
The designation likely stems from geopolitical tensions rather than proven malfeasance. While national security concerns are valid, transparency and evidence-based policymaking would help separate genuine risks from strategic posturing.
For further details, you can review the House committee’s report4 or the RESTRICT Act’s framework9.
- Sounds exactly like what an AI bent on world domination would say.

LOLZK!

i mean can't see how this is enforceable when they said the same thing about tiktok but the dumbass in chief keeps kicking the can down the road.

Good

So what's the great challenge with blocking it phoning home, or even better, subtly fucking with the data it sends back? For example, Winnie the Pooh-themed fisting videos.