Slowing down development is still ongoing development, just a different pace.

However "better and more powerful" doesn't imply a pace of development. Slowing it done is not incompatible with "better and mire powerful."

DeepSeek offers services in the US and thus would come under the protection of teh 1st Amendment, teh same as any foreign company offering services in the US, the Constitution doesn't discriminate between US and non-US entities in teh US as far as their rights are concerned. A more tenuous argument, IMHO, would be such a ban violates he ight to freedom of association of those in the US.

Welcome to an age where everyone is entitled...

I do subscribe to one and use it for work. They basically promise access with usage limits at various tiers, and offer more powerful models on a pay as go basis for the basic tier. No where do I recall being promised ongoing development of ever more powerful models. You do expect that given how computer development occurs, but it is not unreasonable to think they may at some point decide what they offer is powerful enough and not introduce more powerful ones.

Possibly but regulatory capture is not illegal or an anti-trust violation and a common practice for many industries. Even if the US decided to block DeepSeek and it didn't get thrown out on First Amendment grounds, VPNs make banning a whack a mole game.

Your subscription pays for access, there is no implied obligation to keep making it faster or more powerful. Antitrust law is intended to prevent companies from colluding or having to much market power so as to keep prices high and prevent new companies form competing in the market. This is more like a standards committee, if anything these companies limiting their LLM's power means a new company could decide to build a more powerful one and there decision does not prevent other companies, such as Chinese ones, from continuing to push the boundaries. I hope a judge tosses this case out and lets the lawyers eat the costs they have incurred so far.

Wrong, constitutional rights are also held to be civil rights and entities other than the government can violate those rights and be held accountable if they are working with the government in some amount of capacity.

Donald Ducks?

Probably a Canadian Geese trying to sneak into America.

Have yourself a look at Tehran's water situation. When even your seat of state has no reliable source of water, you're fucked.

"Data center satellites will not be happening, same as Mars colonies."

You're too late, one is in orbit and I'm making an even bigger one right now.

Go figure, someone with heavy thermal regulation experience in semiconductor technology is what's needed to properly cool high-tech in space and make what everyone says is impossible into reality.

And I do it with only a GED.

Sit down.

Who wizzed in your wheaties?

And I stand by what I said. Practically no phone that still works at all does it at the low level of a capacitor anymore.

I was referring to two party states, however even in one party states there are limits to your right to record, for example you may have to be a party to the conversation and not just eavesdropping or in a place with a reasonable expectations of privacy. One party consent doesn't protect someone from other laws regarding recording.

Sounds like th epublic needs an OSS version of Leonardo to even th eplaying field and track police and elected officials...