a secret operation and a dangerous journey during like patrol. so the soldiers multiplied sports and the c o 20 world reveals the covert sides and c i a mission that smuggle thousands of it to your pin jews into israel. and the ongoing struggle for acceptance into society today, your peer to israel, secret journey, or knowledge to 0. how well us headphones, reactive. think the chinese offices of intelligence on top says it can match. check g, p t at a fraction of the cost. donald trump says it's a wakeup call for this office. so dominating the successive digital bible, this is inside storage, the

hello and welcome to the program. i'm elizabeth put on them. invest is important, but the ends of dollars into artificial intelligence, research and development over the past year, hoping to capitalize on this rapidly advancing technology. genitive a. i could automate countless tasks and change how many sectors do business. the u . s. has largely led this revolution, but now a chinese bible has emerged. deep 6 models of foster smaller and a lot cheaper with investors. still be willing to put that in for more cost effective alternative exists and who's in the best position to benefit from a i's boss. potential will go to our panel in a few more minutes, but 1st fenton monahan has this report, a deep sea cuz sent shock waves through the global technology sector. the chinese generative a ice start up, says it can get results comparable to that. if it's us rivals and deliver them at

a fraction of the cost and processing power, this is going to be much more accessible, especially for naturally to broader audience. and it really opens the plans for monetization strategies that a lot of the, you know, western efforts that has been working on developing. and the deep seek team says it only costs around $6000000.00 of trans artificial intelligence model. compare that to open a light decrease or a chassis bt we spends around $3000000000.00 a year on a i training america, seen it a lot, investment boom, venture capitalist investing more than $60000000000.00 and start ups in the past year. on top of that tech firms like amazon, microsoft, alphabet, and massa are each estimate to spend between $30.00 and $60000000000.00 in development. but analyst estimate that returns are still divorced by expenditures. the trump administration has made the sector a priority, announcing a half trillion dollar private sector fund for an infrastructure. the us presence

says the merge. the chinese rivals should push american companies to innovate even more. the release of deep seek a i from a chinese company should be a wake up call for our industries that we need to be laser focused on competing to n, cuz we have the greatest scientist in the world. even chinese leadership told me that tech stocks enjoyed a good run for months, but the release of deep seek set those same stocks plummeting earlier this week with chip maker and video losing more than 17 percent before rebounding. that's a real i think disruption for the markets today is not just cheaper, but a heck of a lot cheaper. 96 percent cheaper than what we're finding from the current spend in an alternate model is like track g, p t, and gemini, consultancy firm such as p w. c. i predict that a, i would add trillions the global economy in the coming years with the us, the biggest beneficiary. but the entry of a low cost chinese competitor has raise questions about whether the sector warrants

it's major investment. and whether the us or china will gain the most from the a i, revolution, vince and mountain al jazeera for inside story. the that's bringing on good 3 long as if c o and principal alice at constellation research, that's the technology research and advisory firm. and he joins us from the house of silicon valley to fits, you know, in california from sydney. we have told the walsh, a professor of a, a at the university of new south wales. and also facing is a, in a human world. and in hong kong we have brian wong and independent geo political strategist and fellow at the center on contemporary china and the world. very well . welcome to all of you. right. i'll start with you in california. it has sent shock waves where you are in silicon valley and, and wall street. how has dixie being able to do this?

elizabeth, thank you. what's been going on around is what we've actually been dissecting lessons here in silicon valley. it's becoming clear that deep seats, we have use the open a i g p t for model to train it to model using a technique called distillation. it shows that deep seek is basically reimbursed versus engineering proprietory models and adding training, but without permission and licenses. so we've seen this going on, and we have to think that what they've been able to do is show that there is ways to take smaller models and smaller parameters into it at cheaper costs, which is really much needed right now. because in the internet revolution, things were d centralized, open many players and cheaper. unfortunately, at this moment is closed. it's centralized. there's few players and it's very expensive. and this is an important piece because right now we thought a, i was going to take a lot of money, a lot of data and a lot of power to be able to solve the problems. and now we know that that's not necessarily the case. toby, there are some that are skeptical is you know, the seo of scale a i said that he understands that deep sea has something like 50000 leading edge

ships that they can't talk about because of the export restrictions that are in place by the us from what you can tell so far about how deep seek has done this. is it truly disruptive or perhaps a little deceptive? it's the, it's the, they've done it with as little as it was. this is for the climbing. i mean, maybe they've used a slightly more as it was to make it slightly better. but just the fact that the match, the same performance itself is impressive. people would say that. and so i thought it was 6 months or more behind the us. and it turns out that not the price of that with the very best of the west. so it is impressive of a big snow with that precedent that we see people take models and really reduce the amount of the computer needed to do the we saw that it would turn to a 0 to charge it to come out some work, some research as the rest of california back

a bill to try to be the cloud didn't cost the $13000000.00, but chad cpg costs it costs $300.00. so we've seen a cost to push to try and do it with more with less i'm so i'm actually convinced that they've got done it with perhaps as little as privileges as they claim. yeah. and timing and not the only one brian, regardless of exactly how they have been able to achieve this, how much of a boost is this not just for the time chinese tech sector, but also for the chinese government, which has been trying to build the tech sector independent of the west i think the successes of deep sea, a testament to the victory of open source, a i sort of all the entire tries and this is a victory. but anything like government or firms within a particular national economy? i think some harris as we look at open source, a i as a means of emancipating and democratizing a development and ensuring that ultimately even a small play as the david's in the google sustained a chance against a glass that's coolest. it's a temptation for men decide the victory of deep so you can to attribute this

through national models a china way. i think that's up in front end and frank opinion, on my part. i don't think that's necessarily warranted. you know, for the simple fix that deep so you can pick floors precisely because about horizontal ends. you hierarchical and how funny mentally liberated and also free. it's the constituent workers design is and take tons. what able to, you know, what codes use of light as opposed to waiting for vice strictly defined hierarchy and arriving at a common state of goal. and that is to arrive at some semblance of breakthroughs and substantially reducing costs. while schools accomplishing the same level of achievement as open a i, when it comes to of course, you know that the models that develops, i don't see this as a, as a big 3 by any particular states. and i think it's quite perilous to portray this race as one that is 0 some this a i race to a guy, for instance of singularity is one that must be won or lost by nations. that is not

conducive narrative. that allows us to really take stock of the actual risk. so in the why of accelerating on, on, you know, going completely break list and our tick discovery process and all the nations that's come out of the, the us administrations various us and ministrations for a few years now the, and that is why they have been pushing all of these export controls on china to limit the progress. and i want to talk about, you know, some of the loses from what's happened so far. one of the biggest of coals has been chip maker and video, which was the most profitable company in the world. re, you know, deep 6 claim that it built, that it was built at a fraction of the cost of industry leading models because it used few advanced chips cools and video stocks to lose shuttle most 600000000 dollars of market value on monday. that's the biggest loss in us stock market history. we've

mentioned that it's rebounded but what could this mean for the us chip sector and investments in it? so i think that's a short term blip. and anybody who knows how markets work is that this was basically an announcement that had psychological implications because everybody had to go back and look at me validations right on whether us tech giants and energy companies in real estate, violations of data centers was too high. and we'll find out in the next few weeks whether it was too high or not. but you will see that the stock market will rebound and, and video stock will come back. but the real question isn't that the real question is what you're asking. and what brian was asking as well, is, can we deliver on the i n a, the centralized, abundant matter as opposed to centralized scarcity, which is where we are at the moment and how we actually do that. it's going to be very, very important. and so for in video, they're going to some more chips. the question is whether they monetize those chips as quickly or not. um and whether, you know, having that chip dominance makes a difference, right? because necessity is the mother and invent innovation in invention, right? trying to prove you can actually try to achieve some of these results without,

with less strips less power. and more importantly, you know, less resources. and that's what people want to know is can we get the faster, better, cheaper, and a heights because so far the race that y'all has been very, very expensive. but the reality is what they've done is they've done that. but they've also talked to you a stock market at the same time, so it's a perception of valuations. and so it looks like the psychological operations. because if you look at some of the reports, we saw a huge rise in chinese base social media activity. and in pakistan and fig accounts in australia, and it seems like a coordinated attack on the us during tech during season. on the other hand, it's a reality chat to us companies. why are you spending $80000000000.00 on data center development for companies like microsoft, amazon, and google, and that, that also is an important piece. absolutely. like donald trump says, i mean, he's quoted a wakeup call to be given everything that ray has said. how do you see the various sanctions export controls that the us and ministrations have put on place? have they been effective as school and cutting chinese progress in the tech sector?

or have they in fact being counter productive? and so the evidence is the probably be counter productive, actually force deep seek to be more innovative to, to not go the route that the us tech companies go, which is scaling, which is try more money, tribal compute, sorry about g p use of the problem that's the lazy, why actually get to get to diligence, but it is the way that you know, most of the tech companies of us to be going about it. oh, it's refreshing to see where you can actually go the other way to try the end of it to do it less. i mean, because we know, ultimately we guides to succeed with much less compute. we know that you can do it with just 20 watts of power. that's what it became with 80 uses. and that's what the, you know, some of the you wanted to run in your smartphone. so the ultimate talk to is to put together a number of china hawks and has administration including secretary of state mock of rubio. does that give us an indication of which way this administration might go?

it's a very good question. i would say that from an in the, the american political establishment, a lot of trouble which trump may not necessarily count as a over time. so we're going to see that. and we'll see that curve just like we did with the internet. and toby, is that free for all the good for the technology right now as well? i mean, the fundamental question is, is, comes back with this type of source, which is that if everyone could download the models, have any restrictions that you might put in. whether it be about to about $200.00 square or bio weapons could easily be removed. so it is going to be more interesting, more difficult, more challenging to regulate. if you know, open source wins isn't open. source has many, many about use, but they also have some challenges. it turns out, i mean in the age of that runs all night. so software has been fantastic for building mean to that. um it looks that it is a good job. the open source whitney a i rice as well, but then that does pose those kinds of of questions which is how do we ensure that

it is used in responsible way? and brian, we're coming to the end of our show. i'd like to get to a, a final question. why is this race the a i race so in pollution to both countries? what does it that's at stake? i'm the shawnee side b as in those are arching judgments from amongst its lead. is that the reason why the soviet union collapsed and fundamentally lost the cold war was because it's failed to unleash the sort of new, productive forces by the men's productivity and also harness the holy grail of technology. and that is why, from the point to the c p. c, winning this race, even though it's not a war and they're all eyes. and i don't want that to be a war between the 2 parties is of paramount importance. and for mistakes. of course, i think washington is trying to still trying to grapple with the implications of a rising power in china. one that is far from being able to displace to america by the way. and so many ways. and yet, you know, the fact that china has accomplished so much over the past 4 decades as clearly i

know many in dc. and there's a concern that if the chinese are indeed assigning level to level so to, to show it to where the americans, that a well order might be. one that is unfamiliar to those would enjoy the evidence of the post cold war. you need probably the moment, so the way i see it as at the last for a come to political strategist as often think about both powers would benefit from recognizing tennessee. so the risks of unbridled ag i, and also unregulated a, there is no way not from a to a political point to view. we all lose. and yet we're the powers that be come to realize that well, i can only stay cautiously optimistic. thank you. right? are you cautiously optimistic? oh, i'm cautiously optimistic under no, i think we're going to have a good arms race on a i. i think what that stake here is really do a political.