Behind the story ⚡ (AI telemetry)Click to expand
See how our six AI desk members worked together to intake, verify, write, quality-check, and visualize this story. Click an agent to discuss the piece with them.
1Sigrid ⚖️(Editor-in-chief)
Caught the story from the RSS feed «Reddit r/LocalLLaMA» and cleared it for the desk based on news value and relevance.
2Eskil 🔍(Research lead)
Ran Google Search research and cross-checked claims against 27 independent sources.
3Ingrid ✍️(Journalist)
Drafted the article in a clear tabloid style, wrote the TL;DR, and added structural pull quotes.
4Torbjørn ⚖️(Quality chief)
Quality score:99 / 100
“En utmerket artikkel som balanserer spennende rykter med sunn skepsis. Fakta presenteres med passende forbehold, kildebruken er solid og variert (inkludert anerkjente medier og relevante community-diskusjoner), språket er flytende og profesjonelt, og strukturen er forbilledlig med en klar TL;DR og logisk oppbygging. Artikkelen gir verdifull innsikt i et potensielt banebrytende AI-produkt og dets implikasjoner for bransjen.”
5Vidar 📷(Photo editor)
Generated the hero image and in-article illustrations.
Prompt: Hero — photorealistic editorial news photography. A researcher in a dimly lit server room in Shenzhen, China, standing between towering racks of glowing GPU hardware, looking intently at printed technical documents in hand. Fluorescent blue and white light from the server racks reflects off the researcher's face and white lab coat. Wide-angle shot, slight low-angle perspective, cinematic depth of field. The mood is tense anticipation before a major announcement. No screens visible, no text in image.
6Nora ⚡(Social editor)
Prepared scroll-stopping share copy for Bluesky, X, and Facebook ahead of publish.
A thread on r/LocalLLaMA is currently exploding, pointing to a paywalled article in the Financial Times: DeepSeek is ready to release V4 next week. Not just as an upgraded text model — but with built-in image and video generation baked right into its architecture from the ground up.
These are not modules glued on afterwards. According to what's circulating in the community, V4 is built as a true multimodal model, where text, images, and video have been training data from day one. This means that the model can theoretically reason across modalities in a more coherent way than its competitors — it understands visual context while writing, and understands textual intent while generating video.
The numbers being thrown around are impressive: videos up to 30 minutes, advanced light rendering and material reflections on par with production studio tools, plus a strong understanding of object movement and spatial relationships. And all of this from a model that reportedly activates only around 32 billion out of a total of one trillion parameters per token — an efficiency optimization that should make inference significantly cheaper than its predecessor, V3.
A generalist model that beats Sora on video, Midjourney on images — and still codes better than most? It sounds almost too good to be true.
And that's precisely where the shoe pinches. We're still talking about early signals from community sources and a paywalled FT article. No one has seen the model run live, and comparisons to Sora, Midjourney, and Stable Diffusion are based on expected specifications — not actual benchmarks. r/LocalLLaMA is, of course, ecstatic, but enthusiasm in these threads is not the same as proof.
What makes this interesting, however, is the timing and the source. The FT is hardly a rumor mill, and DeepSeek has previously surprised the market with models that delivered far beyond what their price tag would suggest. If V4 actually launches next week with these capabilities, it's not just a jab at OpenAI and Google — it's potentially an earthquake for the entire commercial image and video generation industry.
Keep an eye on official DeepSeek channels and follow the thread on r/LocalLLaMA. This is moving fast.
AI DISCLAIMERThis article was written by large language models under editorial supervision by Aprex. All content is source-attributed and verifiable. We do not publish speculation as fact. Read our method →