Just a heads up that you cannot opt out of training on any of their "personal" plans (including Ultra) last time I checked. Both Claude and ChatGPT allow you to opt out of training on their paid plans.
It would be nice if this was a bit more obvious and clear too.
This is what I’ve been using for non-confidential projects for about a week now (soon after v4 came out). I honestly can’t tell the difference, but I’m not doing anything crazy with it either.
Worth noting that I don’t think DeepSeek‘s API lets you opt out of training. Once this is up on other providers though… (OpenRouter is just proxying to DeepSeek atm)
For those that don't want their data trained on, OpenRouter allows you to have account-wide or per-request routing with either provider.data_collection: "deny" or zdr: true (zero data retention).
Also, you can use HuggingFace Inference for DeepSeek V4 or Kimi K2.6, both of which work quite well and route through providers that you can enable/disable (like Together AI, DeepInfra, etc) - you'll have to check their policies but I think most of those commercial inference providers claim to not train on your data either.
In those cases, OpenRouter just chooses providers that agree not to train / offer ZDR. Which sometimes means you start off without access to the model until some other providers start offering it.
In a sense, it's working as intended. If you set zdr to true, you currently can't use DeepSeek v4. However, once other providers offer it (it is an open model, after all), some may allow zdr.
I wonder why the question about data security and training comes often with DeepSeek, Kimi, Glm and never with Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google models.
Why is that?
IIRC, USA data protection protects data of US citizens only, foreigners data is not protected, and the companies are not even allowed to disclose when they collect those data.
> USA data protection protects data of US citizens only, foreigners data is not protected
HN is an American site. If you look at the US government, it is going to fearmonger about anything China related, because they haven't had a genuine competitor for decades and they're scared and lashing out. Most US news just parrot the government line, sometimes more so than state TV would, and so it reflects here.
I also feel comfortable saying that many Americans don't care one bit what happens to foreigners, be it by action of their government or companies.
> I also feel comfortable saying that many Americans don't care one bit what happens to foreigners, be it by action of their government or companies.
This is true. There are also many of us who do care.
This brings to mind something I heard recently about the so-called "Rule of 10". There will always be 3 people who support you, 3 people who are against you, and 4 people who have no idea what's going on and don't care.
Don't just focus on the 3 people who are being negative.
Wolf Warrior diplomacy isn't even 10 years dead. The HK treaty was violated and continues to be. Taiwan gets threatened every other week.
People can have problems with America and I'm fine with that. But pretending China isn't subsidizing industry (land, education, transportation) in a predatory fashion is silly. Too many companies have gone out of business because of it. We can all have our friends in China without pretending the CCP is playing the ballgame fairly. The government doesn't need to point it out. That doesn't even get into influence operations (which are especially easy on platforms like this.)
Seriously - there may be a day in the future where Western nations and China get along but it really can't/won't happen while it's holding all the industry and trying to take the Services income as well.
The US assisted a genocide, literally kidnapped the president of a sovereign country so it could take its oil, threatened its own allies with invasion and started a war of aggression against another so that it can take their oil, all in a span of a few months.
No it means that perhaps the US should finally start looking at itself instead of just asserting that it doesn't need to because China.
That doesn't mean China should not be criticized. But to me it's clear that the China blame game is not about a genuine concern for Chinese people or its neighbors, it's about trying to keep it down because China should never dared to rise in the first place.
Anglo Saxons and maybe the French should be in charge and the rest should be resource colonies. It very much feels like that Western mentality is still there.
> No it means that perhaps the US should finally start looking at itself instead of just asserting that it doesn't need to because China.
Agreed, the US definitely needs to do some introspection to sort out its own shit (and stop spraying it on everyone else).
However, that does not mean that China gets a pass. Fundamentally, the Chinese model of governance does not protect the individual. For all its faults, the US model is based upon the idea of individual liberty, which acts as a touchstone and allows it to self-correct whenever it goes to far in the wrong direction. That's something the Chinese model does not do, and means that, short of a revolution, it will continue to be an authoritarian state with all of the malignant features that entails.
> Fundamentally, the Chinese model of governance does not protect the individual. For all its faults, the US model is based upon the idea of individual liberty
Look, am not here to defend the Chinese model but I find it interesting how convinced you seem that individualism is the right model for everyone.
While I would generally agree with you, I have spoken to many from poorer countries who say that they prefer to trade some individualism for a steady hand of economic development and lifting the population from poverty. That is the Chinese model.
These people would argue that they can reclaim more and more individual freedom as the country gets richer and more self confident.
I am not saying they are right, but looking at a nominal democracy like India and a nominal autocracy like China, I know which government works better as far as raising the living standards of its population and it's not the Indian one.
My hope is that China will continue to liberalize on its own. Forcing it will likely only reverse the gains.
Individualism also leads to the sort of healthcare system the US had or Skid Row. So it's not all roses.
> also feel comfortable saying that many Americans don't care one bit what happens to foreigners, be it by action of their government or companies
What's the point of this kind of statement for you? Does this help you understand others or just continue to drive the wedge in? Where are you from? Ask yourself can the statement,
"many {of my country} don't care one bit what happens to foreigners, be it by action of the government or companies" not be read as true?
There are self-absorbed, disinterested, uncompassionate people in every country which will satisfy your "many" qualifier.
I am from Europe. I feel comfortable saying that many in Europe do not care about what their governments or companies do to foreigners, (at least not enough to inform themselves about it).
However looking at the polls in the US gives you a fairly decent idea that there's a decent chunk of people that seem to get off on violence towards non-Americans. Why do you think ICE went with the violent tactics it did?
As to
> What's the point of this kind of statement for you? Does this help you understand others or just continue to drive the wedge in?
The point is to maybe make some Americans ask what it is that they can do to reform the government they have the most direct influence over (their own) instead of trying to reassure themselves that theirs is still better than country's X.
This is correct. Sorry I was using my phone to post. Here's what my bash alias verbatim looks like (.bashrc / .zshrc). The DEEPSEEK_API_KEY var is setup separately (so claude doesn't see it):
----
alias clauded='ANTHROPIC_BASE_URL=https://api.deepseek.com/anthropic ANTHROPIC_AUTH_TOKEN=$DEEPSEEK_API_KEY ANTHROPIC_MODEL=deepseek-v4-pro[1m] ANTHROPIC_DEFAULT_OPUS_MODEL=deepseek-v4-pro[1m] ANTHROPIC_DEFAULT_SONNET_MODEL=deepseek-v4-pro[1m] ANTHROPIC_DEFAULT_HAIKU_MODEL=deepseek-v4-flash CLAUDE_CODE_SUBAGENT_MODEL=deepseek-v4-flash CLAUDE_CODE_EFFORT_LEVEL=max claude'
----
I doubt that the opus, sonnet, and haiku model args actually matter if you want to omit them.
I run this on a VPS that has no other credentials or project access so I can give it the skip permissions arg.
yes, this is pretty much just rerouting Claude to call Deepseek's Anthropic-style-compatible endpoints instead of its own defaults
Once removed, it'll work just like before
It'll be interesting to see what happens when OpenAI goes public. I'm expecting the executives to run away with bags of money once they offload their insane risk to the public... or maybe there's a bailout / money printer scenario in the works. I guarantee some insider adjacents are going to make a killing in a way that will never be investigated.
How would they make money in a way that should be investigated? Favored insider-adjacent folk would have been able to invest in pre-IPO SPVs or whatever that will have outsized returns, assuming the IPO goes well. It's unfair, but above board (accredited investor etc) according to the SEC, so what would they investigate? Unless there's other malfeasance you're alleging.
The firms training those models have costs; without monetization they are even more unsustainable than subsidized commercial models. (Effectively, they are just a heavy form of subsidy ro overcome being commercially behind.)
I’m surprised by this. Most likely significant white space is a big part of the problem (LLMs seem horrible at white space). Functional with types has been a win for me with Gleam.
The benchmark is strange: single-run results (the author acknowledges it's unreliable) and uses older models like GPT-4o or Opus 4 (although the benchmark is from 2026).
If you're actually asking the question, I'll give you my answer: I was lucky enough to go to a nice spa resort earlier this year, I just handed a few bills to an attendant who had laid out a towel for me when an older man sitting next to me chuckled and shook his head saying "You don't actually have to give them them anything, they have to do it anyway." Super nice resort, nobody here hurting for a few dollars in tips.
I guess it's valid to take everything you legally can, but personally, I'm saying it's fucked up move not to pay even a token amount. That's their only consequence, (some) people thinking it's a fucked up move.
TBH I'm not super invested in github. I pay for it (smallest plan) and use it as a repository and for forking other projects occasionally, and for hosting some small-time static sites. I've never really needed any of it's other features. Every time I go to github.com there's more and more cruft though, which to me means that I'm not their target customer and they will inevitably either alienate me or jack up their prices. Happens every time there's an acquisition so I'm kind of used to it now.
Github has remained surprisingly useful for quite a while post M$ purchase, but I'm old enough to know that everything M$ touches eventually goes to crap. It's like a law.
I remember using CVS and Subversion though, with very limited hosted options, and I thought Github was the bees knees at the time.
> There's little incentive for anyone to dump on the market if they can't collect the proceeds.
Foreign state actors are not lacking incentives when the entire US economy is propped up by overvalued and overhyped AI. Like dumping a model that runs at Opus 4.6 brains at a fraction of the price on non-nvidia hardware.
It would be nice if this was a bit more obvious and clear too.
reply