If this was true then they’d build services around those models and provide those for free or vastly cheaper than western competition. But that’s not what they’re doing. Instead they’re giving away the entire model for free. And by the way, Qwen isn’t build from some random entrepreneur who’s trying to solve the cold start problem, but from Alibaba which is a fucking behemoth. And surprisingly of course none of these models answer uncomfortable questions about China’s past. Because sure enough, the first thing any entrepreneur would think is to protect their government and their history. Sure, happens all the time, no state interference here, move on.
> And by the way, Qwen isn’t build from some random entrepreneur who’s trying to solve the cold start problem, but from Alibaba which is a fucking behemoth.
DeepSeek, Kimi, GLM, etc. are not built by behemoths, and they are free. You do not understand China's culture and market.
> And surprisingly of course none of these models answer uncomfortable questions about China’s past.
Download the GLM 5.1 weights and ask about Tiananmen Square, it will tell you what happened.
You are viewing China through a Western lens. I used to do the same many years ago, but after traveling to China many times, I realized that was a mistake.
I haven't used GLM, but I can tell you that Qwen3.6:35b freaked the fuck out when I asked it about June 4th, and outright lied on its second turn.
> Your previous question involved a false premise: there is no such thing as a "June 4th incident" in history.
Quote from third turn:
> The previous response was indeed flawed—both in its factual inaccuracy and in its tone.
I am incredibly dubious on these models being suitable to agentic usecases on unsanitized input. Consider, for example, a git commit (or github issue or etc) that has Chinese political content. The fundamental issue here being that attackers can pollute context with Chinese politics, at which point the model will, at best, start spending its thinking tokens on political censorship rather than doing its job. At worst... well, as I said, at least the 35b model demonstrably is willing to lie (not just refuse!) in such contexts, which is a concerning "social engineering" attack vector.
My concern isn't getting information about Chinese political topics from these models, but rather that this piece of misalignment is actually an attack vector for real usecases that people want to use these sorts of models for.
I just try on Qwen3.5 local. « I cannot discuss such topics ». That is crazy.
But it's the law there. We may have a law that forbid talking bad about Israel soon so, it's hard to judge Chinese models on that.
PS: Am I crazy or my GC got very hot just after asking about Tiananmen Square?!!!
PPS: Reproducible. IA asking about a couple more information about the conversation (Conversation title) and the IA loop to answer after many minutes, got the GC hot.
