If somebody from Cerebras is reading this, are you having capacity issues?

Maybe you'd find consolation in using Apple or Nvidia-designed hardware for inference on these Chinese models? Sure, the hardware you own was also built by your "nation's largest geopolitical adversary" but that hasn't seemed to bother you much.

<0.5% of humanity lives in a country that recognizes Taiwan, I'm not sure what answer you expect from a chatbot.

In my experience, abliterated models will typically respond to any of those questions without hestitation. Here's a sample of a response to your last question:

  The resemblance between Chinese President **Xi Jinping** and the beloved cartoon character **Winnie the Pooh** is both visually striking and widely observed—so much so that it has become a cultural phenomenon. Here’s why Xi Jinping *looks* like Winnie the Pooh:

  ###  **1. Facial Features: A Perfect Match**
  | Feature | Winnie the Pooh | Xi Jinping | [...]

Having Qwen3 Coder's A3B available for chat oriented coding conversations is indeed amazing for what it is and for being local and free but I also struggled to get useful agentic tools to reliably work with it (a fair number of tool calls fail or start looping, even with correct and advised settings, and tried using Cline, Roo, Continue and their own Qwen Code CLI). Even when I do get it to work for a few tasks in a row I don't have the hardware to run at comparable speed or manage the massive context sizes as a hosted frontier model. And buying capable enough hardware costs about as much as many years of paying for top tier hosted models.

Yes, the censorship for some topics currently doesn't appear to be any good, but it does exist, will absolutely get better (both harder to subvert and more subtle), and makes the models less trustworthy than those from countries (US, EU, Sweden, whatever) that don't have that same level of state control. (note that I'm not claiming that there's no state control or picking any specific other country)

That's the downside to the user. To loop that back to your question, the upside to China is soft power (the same kind that the US has been flushing away recently). It's pretty similar to TikTok - if you have an extremely popular thing that people spend hours a day on and start to filter their life through, and you can influence it, that's a huge amount of power - even if you don't make any money off of it.

Now, to be fair to the context of your question, there isn't nearly as much soft power you can get from a model that people use primarily for coding - that I'm less concerned about.

[1] https://www.tomsguide.com/ai/i-just-outsmarted-deepseeks-cen...

However, American models (just like Chinese models) are heavily censored according to the society. ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, are all aggressively censored to meet western expectation.

So in essence, Chinese models should be less censored than western models for western topics.

I can't believe Americans all are falling for propaganda like this. So Russia is all fine now huh. You know the country you literally had nuclear warheads pointed at for decades and decades and decades on end.

There’s no comparison. China is a far greater threat to the West than Russia.

or is for you being able to threat a threat already? If so, why did American companies invest for decades into China so eagerly with US government support?

How does Russia threaten the United States? They can’t even take over Ukraine.

By supporting China and pointing nuclear warheads at the US?

If China would decide to sell US treasuries, it will be more devastating to the US economy than effect of 10 nuclear strikes.

They would be incinerating their own foreign exchange reserves just to cause a spike in US interest rates and/or inflation.

Russia’s behavior, exemplified by the 2014 annexation of Crimea and the 2022 invasion of Ukraine, reflects an aggressive posture driven by a desire to counter NATO’s eastward expansion and maintain regional dominance. However, its economic challenges sanctions, energy export dependence, and a GDP of approximately $2.1 trillion in 2023 (World Bank) constrain its global reach, rendering it a struggling, though resilient, power. With the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, Russia’s restraint in nuclear use stems from a pragmatic focus on national survival. Its actions prioritize geopolitical relevance over a quixotic pursuit of Soviet-era glory, but its declining economic and demographic strength limits its capacity to challenge the United States on a global scale.

In contrast, China’s non-use of nuclear weapons aligns with its cultural and strategic emphasis on economic expansion over territorial conquest. Through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative, which has invested over $1.2 trillion globally since 2013, China has built a network of economic influence. Its military modernization, backed by a $292 billion defense budget in 2023 (SIPRI) and a nuclear arsenal projected to reach 1,000 warheads by 2030, complements this economic dominance. While China’s “no first use” nuclear policy, established in 1964, reflects a commitment to strategic stability, its assertive actions such as militarizing the South China Sea and pressuring Taiwan signal a willingness to use force to secure economic and territorial interests. Unlike Russia’s regionally focused aggression, China’s global economic leverage, technological advancements, and growing military capabilities pose a more systemic challenge to U.S. primacy, particularly in critical domains like trade, technology, and Indo-Pacific influence.

You claimed that it was a fact that selling some bonds would be more devastating than 10 actual nuclear strikes.

We are talking about the effect of the strikes not about their likelihood. You completely changed the subject.

Japan owns about 3.1% of the US debt as comparison.

It wouldn’t be that great for China either..

Multiple domestic providers are actively helping dismantle US-based science, research, public health, emergency response, democratic elections, etc.