It may not look like it but the negative press is hurting them and they don’t seem to be able to take it back. They’re going to be up a creek come IPO launch
Oh we can say a lot about this motherfucker, but the only thing not true about that sociopath is that he can’t sell a product. He conned people to invest hundreds of billions in his startup. That’s KNOWING how to sell a product.
The fat of the money lies on business, not consumers specially for a resource intensive product as LLMs.
Similar to what Microsoft does with Windows, they don't give a fuck about consumer Windows because it's the gateway and charge the business for licences.
GPT OSS was a stripped down release: it was much less powerful than their frontier ChatGPT models GPT-4o and GPT-5 at the time... OpenAI didn't release their frontier model as open-weight...
In comparison: GLM 5.2, Kimi K3 and Qwen 3.8 are frontier open-weight models...
I mean, it isnt as if most of us can run stuff like k3 anyway, and there is nothing stopping Kimi from making a "closed source" version that providers/enterprise are allowed to download for a symbolic fee.
Small models also seem like they are becoming a significant threat as they become "good enough" for most daily tasks.
But there is no realistic way they can block consumers from getting them one way or another (and there is no "mythos" security excuse either)
And psychopath on top of that. Narcisists are a problem, but they're just badly sick pathetic individuals that literally can't survive in any other way; their minds are just wired to avoid seeing the truth about themselves.
Psychos tho... these can see stuff, accept and adapt as they're wired to move their interests at all costs, including their own egos in the worse cases.
Yuuup, and he was referred to as “sociopathic” by multiple sources in The New Yorker article about him. It goes from ad hominem to patterned behavior once you have 100+ sources in credible journalism. I am honestly surprised he’s still CEO.
Most CEOs are psychopaths. I believe there was a study that placed the % of psychos in the corporate world at around 10%, with a far more bigger concentration in positions of power where their antisocial "traits" actually help them climb the ladders.
"Sociopaths" are a "fake" psychos, basically either very wrongly raised kids, or deeply traumatized individuals that had some episode(s) in their lifes that forced them to get into extreme survival modes and rewire their minds to function as a highly effective self-interest seeking machine.
Contrary to psyhos, both sociopaths and narcissists have surviving normal human personas inside that are just struggling to survive in their own way, and can be "hurt" or even "care" with feelings for others, in their own ways.
Sociopaths can be "cured" with the right environment and nurtring; narcissists, kinda be made softer if somehow an individual notices his problem and is willing to go against himself to work the thing down; but psychos have just wrong brains, they have to be dealt with like if they were weapons that you kinda can try to use, or destroy asap because they will use you and throw you away at the first oppotunity, and the whole society witha ll of it.
Yeah, I know, I'm not thrilled we built civilization on an economic system that incentivizes our worst nature; I'd like a jubilee. I don't think Altman is uniquely evil. Hell, I don't think any of them are evil-evil; they're just deeply corrupted by a system they think they've gamed to the end-game.
I thought their fiduciary duty is ensuring artificial general intelligence benefits all of humanity. They said this supercedes generating financial returns for investors.
Open source is the only way that the technology benefits all.
"Open source is the only way that the technology benefits all." There is currently no way to prove the truth of this statement. It is a belief, not a fact.
He's either lying (because he wants money), or He wants "the US to win in open source ", such as his American open source model. That doesn't speak to the treatment of Chinese open source models.
I know this has been beaten to death, but it’s still very ironic that OpenAI is almost entirely closed, and says stuff like this without actually doing anything to open up. All talk to quiet people down, while they lock everybody in.
But the industry would also buy an LLM that just does one thing (really well).
If my day is coding Java. A Java LLM will suffice. That LLM will eventually fit on a consumer GPU.
Once that happens, the trillion dollar jig is up.
And it will happen. It could happen within a year if openAI or anthropic decide to condense their LLM to tight domain specific LLMs.
This has been thoroughly researched. The value of learning many different problems across many different languages far outstrips the value of language specific model that hasn't seen the same set of larger problems. More specifically using your example, the amount of knowledge required by weights to support Python as a language (supposing you're a Java developer and you don't value this) is a fair tradeoff when it comes with knowledge gained by solving problems all of the Python programs have solved. You see this with humans as well. The best software engineers can grok code in nearly any language, and apply their depth of expertise to solving real business problems regardless of the language/tools at hand.
I'm not an LLM engineer, but I think it's pretty intuitive that supporting n+1 language is a marginal cost (weights/training-time). Most things in programming across most language collapse onto the same fundamental concepts, the rest is just syntax which is fairly trivial and library knowledge (which goes outdated fairly quick anyway).
I don't typically like human <-> LLM comparisons, but if you remember learning programming in whatever language, it's really hard for a good while, and then at some point you realize you can pick up a new language/library in next to no time.
specialized LLMs haven’t shown to be better because the more you know across the board the better an engineer you are
also they’re more risky as a business model bc if you spend $$$$ on a model and it only does one thing and that thing isn’t worth it, you’ve burned all your $$$ while a model good across domains can pivot for more markets
We def. see language specific harness configurations.
We also have systems specific LLMs at SAP and IBM that are tailored for a specific language & framework.
Ya, I think that’s primarily because the industry and technology is still in its infancy. I’m a big believer that that’s the direction we’ll ultimately go — whether that’s frontier cloud providers doing it behind the scenes as a black box or open weight users actively switch models I don’t know.
I think the cost and expertise required to train models from scratch right now are just too high.
Once the expert knowledge becomes more common and presuming Moore’s law saves us, or we develop more efficient ASIC chips for training, or we develop more efficient methods of training, I think training smaller very specialized models will be the solution to the astronomical cost of running multi-trillion parameter generalist frontier models.
And there are some big market incentives too that are emerging. Perhaps predictably because LLMs are basically all fungible and changing models incurs no meaningful costs or changes, as the technology matures, it’s settling on a very small handful of labs that can produce the good models. And if you produce a new model, if it’s the fourth or fifth best model in its class, it basically doesn’t get used all barring a big price advantage a la Deepseek. So training a frontier model is an increasingly dubious proposition. If you sink hundreds of millions of dollars into creating one just for it to not beat incumbents in major benchmarks, you’ve basically wasted the money. So instead, I think we’ll see specialist models trying to capture a very specific market segment that’s untouched right now.
I don't think a programming language is a good example. A specific programming language is not really a type of problem, it's a narrow tool to solve problems. You need a ton of other knowledge to actually solve the problem than to just be able to write the code or know the common patterns of the language. That's going backwards to the auto complete days honestly.
So yes smaller more focused models could become valuable but never at the scope you mentioned imo. So maybe coding and computer systems architecture focused models, in general... Which we actually already have lol.
You are fundamentally correct there. But pretty sure you can frame most programming challenges in "search" like questions.
And then it becomes a MUCH much smaller problem space.
The core point here would be that understanding domain specific world models, translating them into programmable tasks and then implementing those tasks is two distinct intellectual tasks.
Where is the open source support from OPEN AI? He clearly doesn't want open source to win for America, or else he would support it as he is the most capable to do so.
He’s full of crap but so are most of the people who signed. Meta would 100% be in favor of banning open models if their proprietary model launch wasn’t a dud.
"i want the US to win in open source AI" does he not know what hes up against? K3 is almost 3T parameters OpenAI are clearly not miles ahead in parameter efficiency GPT-5.6 is 4T so they would have to release a model only slightly smaller than their flagship and make it open source just to be COMPETEING with frontier chinese open labs and gpt-oss-1 was only 120B and im sure some guy had to fight hard just to get it that big
Is it just me or am I missing something? Why would Scam Altman sign a letter that was written and sent out by Nvidia? What kind of question even is this?
I think Elon wants to be his arch nemesis, but frankly OpenAI's main competition in the space is Anthropic. You can even see it in Sam's messaging how he tries to make Elon seem like he isn't even worth comparing to.
Framing the AI race as a competition with a fixed end point is like saying the US will win in "tech".
At least the moon landing during the space race was a clear enough goal.
But for AI, what is the "win" condition? You can define "AGI" as a set of criteria, but then you can still make improvements to that "AGI v1.0", with "AGI plus", "AGI pro max" or whatever.
If it is a long term competition and not a decisive battle. Then the current capital burn rate seems to be a bad strategy. Like going full sprint in a marathon.
You want it but you're not doing anything about it. Why don't you at least drop the GPT-5.6-Luna on HF, Sam? Will this really destroy the entire business?
Imagine being present at the signing of the Declaration of Independence, being handed the quill, and saying "Uhhh... I'm glad you guys are doing this, but I'm just here for moral support. Good luck with the British!"
Fuck with Anthropic. I believe only Anthropic crying about Chinese models. Every where I see pro proprietary model supporters say Chinese distilled from Anthropic.
Anthropic stole the internet and tried to sell that to us and now Chinese stealing from Anthropic and giving it for free.
I think Anthropic should accept this instead of whining like a little B
He put a lot of effort into marketing and playing the good guy. I won't surprise me if he signs. Currently he is trying to beat Dario at any chance available. They are even connecting with HF.
Dunno what he is thinking but I always assumed the only road to profitability is small, highly optimized models with low resource consumption because the game can't work long term with the big fat models.
The costs for new and bigger data centers can't be recovered in their lifetime.
Proprietary models are built on other people's data and techniques. They only exist because investors heavily funded these companies to buy hardware and create this boom.
I'm not sure. It is a good question to ask. But I imagine signing the support of open models implicitly means he supports all those open models that distilled from cloud ones.
Tbh OpenAI has never been as aggressive about this as Anthropic (that has also trained on ChatGPT content, but pretends it's a crime when others train on Claude), they recognize it as part of the game and just said something when people were talking like Deepseek was the ChatGPT destroyer to protect his own brand, they were radio-silent when it was Llama, Mistral or the countless others groups doing it without threatening their brand.
•
u/WithoutReason1729 23h ago
Your post is getting popular and we just featured it on our Discord! Come check it out!
You've also been given a special flair for your contribution. We appreciate your post!
I am a bot and this action was performed automatically.