Remix.run Logo
programjames 7 hours ago

Less than two years ago, Sam Altman said

> I kind of think of ads as a last resort for us for a business model. I would do it if it meant that was the only way to get everybody in the world access to great services, but if we can find something that doesn't do that, I'd prefer that.

So, is this OpenAI announcing they're strapped for cash?

danparsonson 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

No, I suspect that "I kind of think of ads as a last resort" was doublespeak for "ads are coming eventually".

I would tend to think of someone like him as a person who uses words to achieve a specific goal, rather than someone who speaks whatever is truly on their mind. Whether those words are lies or truth or somewhere in between is irrelevant; what matters to them is the outcome.

It's likely a waste of time trying to unpick the meaning, because there is none. "But Sam Altman said..." to me has about as much value as "ChatGPT told me...".

3form 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I think doublespeak is more along the lines of calling ads a "product recommendation strategy". This was either a) a plain lie b) they're actually at their last resort.

danparsonson an hour ago | parent [-]

> This was either a) a plain lie b) they're actually at their last resort.

That's thinking like a normal honest human :-) My point is that it was likely not a statement about reality (true or false) at all, but rather a phrase designed to elicit some response in the listener, such as the idea: 'Sam Altman isn't the kind of CEO who would put ads in his products unless he really had to'.

He's not describing how things are, but how he wants you to think about them.

3form 39 minutes ago | parent [-]

I agree with your point. Mine was about the word doublespeak for this, which I think it's not - it's a lie in effect, but I think it is something like what you say, for which I don't know a term of. A bunch of sentences that are said in a complete disregard for truths and untruths; instead they are supposed to get you to believe something.

This also kinda fits the profile of Altman that I'm getting from what I have seen - admittedly without looking in-depth. A person who is on surface a pathological liar, but in fact in a closer look he just says things. They just _happen_ to be complete lies, because that's what you need to do to achieve the goal in the set of circumstances. It's just that because it's as morally objectionable as outright lying, some people would pause and think before doing it, while be seems to just have no qualms at all.

danparsonson 22 minutes ago | parent [-]

Ah, got it. Maybe 'gaslighting' cuts more to the point?

kakacik 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Exactly this. Words are cheap these days, people do say various things to further their goals. Days where leaders stood by their words as sort of moral testament of their character are gone, probably for good.

As we see many people will do or say just about anything to get more money, prestige or power.

notarobot123 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

For now but not for good. Neglecting moral character works as a shortcut for maybe a generation or two. But that path leads to destruction and decay eventually. It can't last.

iugtmkbdfil834 an hour ago | parent [-]

Thank you. Agreed. There are some practical limits to that path. It works in the current ecosystem partially because the resulting degradation is slow, but it is built upon societal trust. Once it is gone, it will be rather painful to restore. A new new deal will be needed, so to speak ( political evocation is accidental, but it is too late for me to coherently rewrite ).

gleenn 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

So what is the best system to get people to be invested in the general welfare of all people? What are we supposed to do?

greggoB 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Your question seems to imply that people have to be corralled towards a specific action, which to me comes across as rather cynical.

Why is it not possible to lay out your arguments honestly and let people decide on the merits?

iugtmkbdfil834 an hour ago | parent [-]

I think, part of the issue is that, as a mass of humans, we tend to be rather dumb. And they certainly don't decide on merits, in aggregate. It is somewhat questionable if they decide on merits even as individuals ( unless we expand the definition somewhat ). But it is possible I got too cynical.

Antibabelic 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Some problems don't have solutions.

bambax 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> "But Sam Altman said..." to me has about as much value as "ChatGPT told me...".

Or Trump. Same profile.

There is something to be admired in this kind of people. They are not bound by their own words. It simply doesn't matter to them what they said a month ago, or a minute ago.

Their words are attached to the instant they are pronounced; they don't concern the future, or the past. They die immediately after they have been said. It's amazing to watch.

danparsonson an hour ago | parent [-]

For certain values of 'admired'... It is impressive, in a diabolical way, and seems to be very effective.

staticshock 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Feels to me like idealism crossing into realism. OpenAI could be the next Google, or the next Facebook, or the next… I don't know, Netflix?

All those companies (and many other large tech companies) have discovered the same arbitrage that older media companies discovered decades ago, which is that we, on the average, are much more willing to pay with attention than with money, even where money would have been the better choice.

Advertising continues to be one of the most powerful business models ever invented, and I don't think that's changing any time soon.

plemer 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Altman is an idealist?

I read this as: I know ads are likely if not inevitable but I can’t say that while I’m trying to gain users and inspire trust but I’ll start to float even in this non-denial the justification for the thing I’m ultimately going to do.

nine_k 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Altman wanting to look idealistic and inspiring.

See it as a brand image advertising campaign of the time.

michaelt 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The ideal is "It would be ideal if everyone on the planet voluntarily paid me $20/month"

Most billionaires are idealists when it comes to this one particular ideal.

yfw 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

So realistically no agi

keyle 2 hours ago | parent [-]

By all accounts, we're 2 years away from AGI, every year.

Arkhaine_kupo 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Its like fussion power, except there we half the funding every year instead of doubling it

phist_mcgee 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Fusion power is proven to be possible.

AGI is not.

b3lvedere 26 minutes ago | parent [-]

There is (eventually) no more profit to be made on energy when energy becomes virtually limitless.

There is (still) a lot of profit to be made on half-baked semi-AGI prospects.

ccppurcell 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think your characterisation of this as discovery is a little naive. What you are describing is a part of enshittification and it happens too often to be an accident. Revenue maximisation is always the end goal. Also it's not that the user is willing to pay with attention. There is no alternative. In fact it's the very opposite, more than once now a product has basically been pitched as "pay us to avoid ads" and then once it dominated the market they introduce ads. That's users trying to choose to pay with money over attention and ultimately being unable to do so.

nerptastic 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Well - I think the writing was on the wall when they announced they were going to be for-profit. Slippery slope and all that, but I’m sure some of this is because they’ve been giving out free tokens for years.

dnnddidiej 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Even as a not for profit they would need cashflow.

mh- 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's not how I read that sentence at all. Maybe I've just been speaking VC for too long.

What he meant was: "I'm going to get everybody in the world access to great services. Doing so means monetizing somehow. Ads will be the last way I chose to do that, but I will if it's the only way I can figure out how to achieve that goal."

normie3000 7 hours ago | parent [-]

You've said the same thing.

> Ads will be the last way I chose to do that

The implication is that they've exhausted all other options.

mh- 7 hours ago | parent [-]

I haven't said the same thing as the parent commenter:

> So, is this OpenAI announcing they're strapped for cash?

It by no means conveys that. It means they haven't figured out another way to monetize something they want to do; it indicates nothing about their financial situation. It means they don't want to sell something at a loss perpetually while they figure it out.

Dylan16807 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Being forced into something you don't want to do, to stop selling at a loss... I would categorize that as some level of strapped for cash.

mh- 7 hours ago | parent [-]

You realize we're talking about a product that is currently free, right? Neither of us have any insight into the margins of their paid offering.

All this means is: we have a free offering that we can't figure out another way to monetize right now.

We can each draw our own conclusions about what that might mean for the state of their business, but all of the other inferences (ha) in this thread are conjecture.

Dylan16807 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> You realize we're talking about a product that is currently free, right? Neither of us have any insight into the margins of their paid offering.

I don't see how that changes the analysis.

> All this means is: we have a free offering that we can't figure out another way to monetize right now.

And they're doing something they significantly don't want to do to monetize it.

Either they fully changed their mind, or the money is somewhat important, or they're utterly crazy.

The first is unlikely, the last is unlikely, the middle one is enough for a casual "strapped for cash".

It's a very minor conjecture. Actions aren't taken for no reason.

mh- 7 hours ago | parent [-]

If we can agree that "strapped for cash" also includes "not stupid with cash", I think we're on the same page here. :)

(For all I know they are strapped for cash, to be clear; I just don't think the quote says that.)

Dylan16807 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Going with a last resort implies more than "not stupid".

mh- 7 hours ago | parent [-]

Okay, fine: "conservative with cash" or even "tight with spending"?

(I'm not sure how much deeper HN threads can nest.)

Dylan16807 7 hours ago | parent [-]

"Tight" gets pretty close to "strapped", especially when it comes to making a change.

(They can go super deep if people are committed.)

mh- 6 hours ago | parent [-]

I concede.

(Haha, ok, let's call a truce here before we break HN! Appreciate the conversation.)

hattmall 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Presumably the way to monetize a free tier is by converting them into paying users.

conductr 5 hours ago | parent [-]

“Upgrade for an Ad free experience” will certainly be a part of it.

swaritshukla 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I also remember him saying that on ig lex friedman podcast. In my opinion, they will only try this on a handful of users and see if it works out or not, just like Anthropic removed Claude code from the pro plan for a very small percentage of users just for testing purposes. It will all boil down to how people respond to the ads rollout.

Aurornis 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The ads are for the free tier and new $8 ad-supported plan.

The revenue from a few ads on the free tier in exchange for limited queries to GPT-5.3 is negligible compared to what they pull in from API costs and the subscription plans. This looks like a play to justify the existence of the previously money-losing free tier as they go into an IPO. Throw some ads in there to make it closer to a neutral on the balance sheet.

The key part of that quote was "everybody in the world". The ads are their way of sustaining the low end of the access.

nine_k 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The revenue from highly targeted ads, using even better profiles than Google Search or even Facebook could build, may be non-negligible.

Commercial ads could be a smaller revenue source than political ads.

zarzavat 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Political ads would destroy the value proposition. That would be an incredibly short-sighted move.

Chats with LLMs are often intensely personal, you don't want to create the perception that politicians have any level of access to it.

b3lvedere an hour ago | parent [-]

"That would be an incredibly short-sighted move."

Yes, but it has not stopped several companies to implement stuff like this to get more money.

chromacity 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The revenue from a few ads on the free tier in exchange for limited queries to GPT-5.3 is negligible

So why chase this negligible revenue?

famouswaffles 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>The revenue from a few ads on the free tier in exchange for limited queries to GPT-5.3 is negligible compared to what they pull in from API costs and the subscription plans.

Unless they botch the implementation, it's not going to be negligible with ~800M+ free subscribers.

kingstnap 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The real question is what do you get out of advertising to people who don't have any money? Kinda squeezing blood from a stone.

You'd be better off saying you use those people to A/B test changes and filling idle GPU batches while giving paying customers a more consistent experience.

troyvit 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> The real question is what do you get out of advertising to people who don't have any money?

Psychographic data. What they learn from these folks will create the most powerful manipulation technology yet.

ldoughty 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

A bunch of people pay to remove ads, and a bunch of people that are happy to give businesses their attention (view ads) I'm exchange for services... I.e. Gmail, YouTube, but don't feel they use enough / are annoyed enough to warrant $15-25/month.

Some brands are okay with impressions.. you can build trust in your product be advertising it for weeks/months and when the user does make a purchase that brand is on the mind.

whiplash451 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That's how it begins.

giancarlostoro 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> The ads are for the free tier and new $8 ad-supported plan.

Dang.

> The revenue from a few ads on the free tier in exchange for limited queries to GPT-5.3 is negligible compared to what they pull in from API costs and the subscription plans. This looks like a play to justify the existence of the previously money-losing free tier as they go into an IPO. Throw some ads in there to make it closer to a neutral on the balance sheet.

Yeah, I guess this time around Sam Altman can't be lying about how many Monthly Active Users he has.

shevy-java 24 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Or, Sam did not speak the truth back then, and always had ads in his mind. I think that was the strategy from the get go.

utopiah 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For somebody so smart, surrounding by people so brilliant, in the very heart of the Silicon Valley, and somehow not learning from the 1 startup that become one of the largest corporations even, namely Google, is a pretty dumb move.

Context : Brin/Page said the same, they didn't like nor want ads, only if it was the last resort. Well, guess which World we all live in now.

bitvvip 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Who can resist the temptation of profit? One always has to make money

bitmasher9 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

If I say “Doing X is a last resort” and then I’m caught doing X, it should raise some eyebrows about my level of desperation.

It’s not that OpenAI is trying to raise revenues that bothers me, it’s how they are doing things that said was desperate just a couple years ago.

bonesss 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> Desperation

You’re right on the core of the issue. I think there has been some temporal stripping of context: that ‘last resort’ needs to be considered against their alternatives.

OpenAI isn’t a business scaling a popular website to profitability, that’s Reddit or Slashdot. OpenAI was promising revolutionary product technology that was breathlessly close to AGI and would eliminate positions and automate coding and, and, and…

Having your next-gen AGI do-it-all platform mature into hoping to recreate the business model of Reddit should raise eyebrows, and let everyone know about the state of The Emperors wardrobe.

They could be building an Office killer and consumer oriented OS’s & ecosystem for near infinite money… they are running ads. Ads for porn and dick pills? Not yet, that’d be another last resort.

bluefirebrand 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Tons of people can resist the temptation, but they aren't likely to be the sort of person that gets put in a role like where Altman is

gbin 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Oh no ... Sweet summer child. Whatever the revenue is, whatever profit there is, whatever cash buffer any corporate has, you can be sure of one thing: they need this to go up and to the right...

It became almost a perfect science to optimize your behavior: this is why you end up, bit by bit with enshitiffied products all around you where basically the pain of using that product is just at the threshold of you actually bashing it against the wall.

ChatGPT is just one of them, like Google search, your TV serving ads or ...

holotherapper 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

"last resort" doing some heavy lifting in that quote.

whatisthiseven 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Sam Altman is the guy fired for lying. Why believe what he claims?

jimmygrapes 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Charitably, it seems that we have yet to find, as a species/society, anything more effectively profitable than ads. I cannot blame those who come to this conclusion so long as no more powerful and proven motivator yet exists. I hate it, but I understand.

LtWorf 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I think ads are just overpriced and companies do not really get that return. But marketing people have no metrics to show that.

m463 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

more like "Sam Altman said"

sayYayToLife 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[dead]

programjames 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I think you're missing that Sam Altman is very smart. If OpenAI really were on the verge of becoming massively profitable due to their next-gen AI, he would not want that information leaking. If Sam Altman acts differently in the world where profits are on the horizon, that information leaks prematurely. Thus, he has to act as if OpenAI is strapped for cash, whether or not it is.

The keyword is "glamorization": https://www.lesswrong.com/w/consistent-glomarization

largbae 6 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This reads similar to the Trump 4D chess excuse. It seems unlikely that this is a ruse, and much more likely that OpenAI's market cap is supported by doing "all the things" to exploit the huge monthly average user base that OpenAI has accumulated.

HWR_14 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I would just assume that they were still spending VC money to lock in users if nothing happened. I would not assume "AI is about to make money obsolete"