I don’t think Anthropic is more ethical than OpenAI. And honestly, OpenAI is not just Altman; we should judge a company by its actions. OpenAI has released more open-source projects, like Codex and GPT-OSS. What has Anthropic given?

This is quite a real take, each time I ask people what's inferior about OpenAI without citing any politics, they can't really do it. gpt-5.5 is above Opus 4.7 for serious engineering as well, and many of their contributions are very useful for the OSS world.

More so, imagine the whole open-source community PREACHING a binary that is literally using heavy telemetry, unknown and questionable behavior instead of codex, completely open-source.

> we should judge a company by its actions

Okay, then let's judge it by the fact that they start as a non-profit and now are are playing the same growth-at-all-costs playbook from Silicon Valley.

Or let's judge them by how they they consider themselves above copyright law, and went on to US congress to say "we can not run this business without stealing intellectual property".

Or how they they don't mind making deals with the Saudis.

Or how they don't mind getting in bed with Trump to secure expedited construction of their datacenters.

Or how they are making all types of accounting fraud (the circular deals) to keep propping up the bubble, and will undoubtly be footed by the taxpayers when it finally pops?

> What has Anthropic given?

Anthropic is also trash. They are guided by this whole "Effective Altruism" bullshit which should be enough to raise all sorts of red flags. But to think that OpenAI is somehow "better" is completely absurd. Both of them are dangerous and both of them should not exist.