IMHO, nothing about OpenAI is sustainable. They are surviving on hype. Even with a great subsidy they are still losing market share, and they have completely lost whatever technical advantage they once had.
They are spending too much money on public opinion (lobbyists, podcasters, subsidies etc), not enough on innovation.
Wow. My takeaway is that OpenAI is subsidizing power users at almost 2x Anthropic’s rate
This can’t be sustainable
Many users backed Gary Marcus's claim that OpenAI depends on hype and unsustainable subsidies instead of real innovation or technical edge, while a few defended its model progress and user scale.
IMHO, nothing about OpenAI is sustainable. They are surviving on hype. Even with a big subsidy they are still losing market share, and they have completely lost whatever technical advantage they once had.
They are spending too much money on public opinion (lobbyists, podcasters, subsidies etc), not enough on innovation.
Wow. My takeaway is that OpenAI is subsidizing power users at almost 2x Anthropic’s rate
This can’t be sustainable
@GaryMarcus ChatGPT: just 1 billion users. Calm down with the dim predictions. Time will tell, but scalability over the value chain of AI is a powerful lever.
@GaryMarcus $5B burn, $3.4B revenue. the math doesn't close. But it's not hype. Sam bet the company on a timeline: AGI before the money ends. Either he's right or he's not.
@GaryMarcus No new breakthroughs, initial ones were in training data already
@GaryMarcus That last paragraph
US in general
Why China ahead
@GaryMarcus Lost technical advantage to who? If demand's growing faster than everyone can scale, the real problem is nobody's actually profitable yet. That's hitting every lab right now, not just them.
@GaryMarcus spending more on perception than product is usually a death spiral
but it might take longer to hit than people think
@GaryMarcus "... and they have completely lost whatever technical advantage they once had." Non-sense, I play around with these models every day, and can confirm OpenAI still dominates when it comes to writing reliable and functional code.
@GaryMarcus the spend on optics vs actual product is catching up
competition isnt slowing down either
@GaryMarcus $5B burn, $3.4B ARR. he's right, math breaks in a couple years. but 'lost technical advantage'? Claude's winning on reasoning, OpenAI on vision. both racing to prove AGI works before the cash dries up
@GaryMarcus I don't want my tax dollars or my 401k invested in that.
It is a speculative investment. Totally inappropriate for most of the people that are not watching.
We are already partners. It is called taxation.
If it makes them feel better we can tax them more.
@jjohana @GaryMarcus Fractions are paying users.
@jjohana @GaryMarcus If you count each webpage visit to a page that has a ChatGPT FAQ helpbot, then sure, 1 billion users sounds reasonable.
@GaryMarcus Please tell us how you really feel!
@GaryMarcus the subsidy math has been looking rough for a while
wonder how long before they pivot the model licensing story
@GaryMarcus actually fair take. the subsidy gap is wild when ur burning cash on lobbying too
@GaryMarcus Let the record show: market share bought through subsidies is not the same as earned through innovation. One endures, the other does not.
@GaryMarcus harsh but hard to argue when you look at the numbers
the lobbyist budget alone couldve funded real research
@GaryMarcus the subsidy angle always gets ignored when ppl talk about their growth
wonder how long that lasts
IMHO, nothing about OpenAI is sustainable. They are surviving on hype. Even with a great subsidy they are still losing market share, and they have completely lost whatever technical advantage they once had.
They are spending too much money on public opinion (lobbyists, podcasters, subsidies etc), not enough on innovation.
Wow. My takeaway is that OpenAI is subsidizing power users at almost 2x Anthropic’s rate
This can’t be sustainable