What's the full story behind China's open-weight strategy?

FalseProfit

Chinese labs have embraced open weights more than almost anyone, and I haven't heard an explanation that fully satisfies me. There are three common ones. š—–š—¼š—ŗš—ŗš—¼š—±š—¶š˜š—¶š˜‡š—² š˜š—µš—² š—°š—¼š—ŗš—½š—¹š—²š—ŗš—²š—»š˜. This is why open models make sense for chipmakers: better free models sell more GPUs. China's chipmakers aren't there yet. The closer fit is cloud: Chinese hyperscalers sell compute, and open models bring customers to it. But that doesn't explain independent chinese labs, which have no cloud business to feed and have done as much as anyone to drive the trend. š—˜š—±š—¶š˜š—¼š—æš—¶š—®š—¹ š—°š—¼š—»š˜š—æš—¼š—¹. The theory is that open models spread Chinese framing on sensitive topics. But open weights are the weakest way to control outputs, since anyone can fine-tune the censorship out, and people have. A closed API would give far more control. š—” š—¹š—¼š˜€š˜€ š—¹š—²š—®š—±š—²š—æ š˜š—¼ š˜‚š—»š—±š—²š—æš—°š˜‚š˜ š—Ŗš—²š˜€š˜š—²š—æš—» š—¹š—®š—Æš˜€. Loss leaders get recouped through lock-in later, and open weights create almost none. This also assumes a coordinated plan among companies that compete hard with each other. My bigger issue is that each of these explains a motive, not a strategy. A well-considered strategy should tell you what winning looks like, and why it still pays off if the future unfolds differently than expected. So I'd love to see someone walk through how open weights play out under a few different futures: š—¦š—°š—²š—»š—®š—æš—¶š—¼ šŸ­: š— š—¼š—±š—²š—¹š˜€ š—Æš—²š—°š—¼š—ŗš—² š—°š—µš—²š—®š—½ š—°š—¼š—ŗš—ŗš—¼š—±š—¶š˜š—¶š—²š˜€. Capability converges and the value moves to applications, deployment, and hardware. š—¦š—°š—²š—»š—®š—æš—¶š—¼ šŸ®: š—§š—µš—² š—³š—æš—¼š—»š˜š—¶š—²š—æ š—øš—²š—²š—½š˜€ š—°š—¼š—ŗš—½š—¼š˜‚š—»š—±š—¶š—»š—“. Whoever leads stays ahead, and the best model is worth far more than the second-best. š—¦š—°š—²š—»š—®š—æš—¶š—¼ šŸÆ: š—§š—µš—² š˜„š—¼š—æš—¹š—± š˜€š—½š—¹š—¶š˜š˜€ š—¶š—»š˜š—¼ š˜€š—²š—½š—®š—æš—®š˜š—² š—”š—œ š—²š—°š—¼š˜€š˜†š˜€š˜š—²š—ŗš˜€. The question becomes whose stack everyone else builds on. What does China get in each, and how would they adjust if the future they're betting on doesn't arrive? My assumption is that there is a more defined strategy that accounts for these, but I have not seen much published on this. Has anyone seen a compelling explanation?

Discussion

No published comments on this page.

Sign in to join the discussion.