Did DeepSeek Use Shell Companies In Singapore To Procure Nvidia Blacklisted Chips?
Tyler Durden

Chinese startup DeepSeek's latest AI models, V3 and R1, were reportedly trained on just 2,048 Nvidia H800 chips—GPUs that were blacklisted by the US government in 2023 for sale to Chinese firms. Federal investigators are now combing through trade data to determine how DeepSeek acquired the restricted chips. 

Bloomberg spoke with sources close to the US probe focusing on "third parties" in Singapore that procured the H800 chips and sold them to DeepSeek—a move we've seen before to circumvent US trade restrictions (read here). 

Here are more details about the probe:

Officials in the White House and Federal Bureau of Investigation are also trying to determine whether DeepSeek used intermediaries in the Southeast Asian nation to purchase Nvidia chips that the US has banned from sale to China, said the people, who requested anonymity to relay private conversations.

At a confirmation hearing on Wednesday, Howard Lutnick, President Donald Trump's nominee to lead the Commerce Department, said, "Nvidia's chips, which they bought tons of, and they found their ways around it, drive their DeepSeek model," adding, "It's got to end. If they are going to compete with us, let them compete, but stop using our tools to compete with us. So I'm going to be very strong on that."

Bloomberg has reported that Trump administration officials are focused on whether H20 chips should be restricted as well. This trend of restricting China from advanced AI chips designed and produced by US or Western-aligned companies ramped up in the last four years. 

According to regulatory filings, Singapore accounts for 20% of Nvidia's revenue. The filings also show that "most shipments associated with Singapore revenue were to locations other than Singapore, and shipments to Singapore were insignificant." 

Biden officials recently expanded rules that large shipments of high-tech chips to Singapore would require a license. However, shipments under 1,700 chips only require notification. 

Those sources close to the federal investigation did not provide Bloomberg with any other details about the Singapore buyers or if those entities were just shell companies. 

A report from late 2023 via Bloomberg found that a shell company in India was buying high-tech US chips, then turning around and selling them to Russia to circumnavigate sanctions.

our mission:

to widen the scope of financial, economic and political information available to the professional investing public.
to skeptically examine and, where necessary, attack the flaccid institution that financial journalism has become.
to liberate oppressed knowledge.
to provide analysis uninhibited by political constraint.
to facilitate information's unending quest for freedom.
our method: pseudonymous speech...
Anonymity is a shield from the tyranny of the majority. it thus exemplifies the purpose behind the bill of rights, and of the first amendment in particular: to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation-- and their ideas from suppression-- at the hand of an intolerant society.

...responsibly used.

The right to remain anonymous may be abused when it shields fraudulent conduct. but political speech by its nature will sometimes have unpalatable consequences, and, in general, our society accords greater weight to the value of free speech than to the dangers of its misuse.

Though often maligned (typically by those frustrated by an inability to engage in ad hominem attacks) anonymous speech has a long and storied history in the united states. used by the likes of mark twain (aka samuel langhorne clemens) to criticize common ignorance, and perhaps most famously by alexander hamilton, james madison and john jay (aka publius) to write the federalist papers, we think ourselves in good company in using one or another nom de plume. particularly in light of an emerging trend against vocalizing public dissent in the united states, we believe in the critical importance of anonymity and its role in dissident speech. like the economist magazine, we also believe that keeping authorship anonymous moves the focus of discussion to the content of speech and away from the speaker- as it should be. we believe not only that you should be comfortable with anonymous speech in such an environment, but that you should be suspicious of any speech that isn't.

 

 

www.zerohedge.com