Chinese company Moonshot AI released a new version of its Kimi model this week, generating another wave of discourse about China and open source AI.
Moonshot said that while the Kimi K3 “still trails behind the most powerful proprietary models, the Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol,” the new open-source model demonstrated “borderline performance across our evaluation suite, consistently outperforming other tested models.” Independent analysis by Arena.ai and Vals AI also suggested that Kimi is competitive with flagship models.
The announcement, which coincided with a speech by Chinese President Xi Jinping at the World AI Conference in Shanghai, appears to have spooked Wall Street, with the Nasdaq down about 1% on Friday as investors sold shares in chip companies such as Nvidia.
Many of the resulting pitches from tech industry figures will sound familiar to those who remember the debate after another Chinese company, DeepSeek, released its open-source R1 model in January 2025. Except now, everything seems heightened after the Trump administration’s tariff war with China, repeated fights over the national security threat allegedly posed by Anthropic companies, and as the last major public companies.
For example, David Sacks—the Trump administration’s former AI czar and now co-chair of the president’s Council of Science and Technology Advisers—contrasted Kimi’s progress to a United States that is “tying itself up in knots: Politicians and bureaucrats are banning new data centers, piling on state regulations and pushing for new federal agencies that are pre-approved, how you lose the front. race.” (The news also gave him an excuse to take a dig at Anthropic, calling Claude an example of “woke lobotomized models.”)
And former Uber CEO Travis Kalanick echoed complaints that the Chinese are “distilling” (ie being trained on the output of) American AI models.
“If distillation is not enforced then everyone should be able to distill from everyone else.. otherwise one arm [would be] tied behind the backs of American models,” Kalanick wrote. (Of course, American models have also been built on top of Chinese ones, specifically Kimi.)
Meanwhile, OpenAI’s head of strategic futures, Dean Ball, said Kimi is “a very good model” whose performance probably can’t be “explained away by distillation or anything like that”, adding that he is “personally surprised that the Chinese state continues to allow open procurement of models this good, given the potential risks.”
Indeed, Ball suggested that “the likely outcome of an open-weight model-dominant world is full AI communism,” where AI is treated as “a ‘public good’ that will ultimately be provided by the state as a kind of ‘digital public infrastructure’.”
“This future strikes me as a dystopian hellscape, but I’ve never met an advocate of open-weight models who doesn’t ultimately admit that this is where things will end,” Ball said. He even suggested that the Trump administration (for which he used to work) will eventually realize that it needs to “create large amounts of regulatory risk around the use of Chinese open weight models.”
“You don’t have to ‘ban open source’ (one of the dumber motifs in AI policy discussion),” Ball said. “You just have to ask all agencies to issue soft legislation that creates R&D [fear, uncertainty, and doubt]. ‘A Federal Reserve advisory bulletin found that there may be backdoors in Chinese AI models.’ It doesn’t have to be so well reasoned. You just create enough regulatory risk that any regulated company will back off.”
However, Shakeel Hashim, editor of the AI-focused publication Transformer, argued that much of the concern is overblown, both because Kimi “probably does not have dangerous cyber capabilities” and because the Chinese government will face “extremely similar incentives” to restrict open Chinese models once they develop these capabilities.
When you buy through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This does not affect our editorial independence.