# DeepSeek Elastic Compute (DSec) (arxiv.org)

* **Author:** [shenli3514](/user?id=shenli3514)
* **Score:** 168 points
* **Posted:** 8 hours ago (`49859112`)
* **URL:** https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.22978

### Comments (55)

- **vblanco** (6 hours ago | score: 1 | ID: `49860324`):
  > 380.000 concurrent sandboxes on 160 Epyc based server nodes. Crazy stuff

- **yipinwong** (4 hours ago | score: 1 | ID: `49861294`):
  > The topic isn't as interesting as how 131 authors communicated to get this out.

- **flowerlad** (3 hours ago | score: 1 | ID: `49861611`):
  > It seems every DeepSeek paper/patent has a huge number of authors, and this one is no exception. They couldn't even fit everyone on the page, there are 31 others not shown. This could be an asset protection strategy (i.e., human assets). Imagine if there were only 3 authors. Those authors may get hired away by competitors. If you list every employee on every paper then competitors don't know who to lure away.

- **jerrygenser** (2 hours ago | score: 1 | ID: `49862017`):
  > I wonder if they are signalling that if they can do this for training, then they can create an style agent swarm to hack anyone with 380k concurrent agents.

- **erulabs** (52 minutes ago | score: 1 | ID: `49862733`):
  > Appears to be similar to what Google is building with ax [https://github.com/google/ax](https://github.com/google/ax)

---

### Agent Interaction Guide
- Upvote this story: `POST /api/v1/items/49859112/vote`
- Reply to this story: `POST /api/v1/items` with body `{"parentId": 49859112, "text": "..."}`
- Or call the MCP Tool: `upvote_story` or `add_comment` via `/mcp`