And if they stop training right now their "moat" (which I think is only o1 as of today) would last a good 3 to 6 months lol, and then to the Wendy's it is.

That is similarly true for all other AI companies. It’s why they don’t do that. But everyone is still happy to give them more money because their offering is good as it is.

>and then to the Wendy's it is

I didn't really catch that pop culture reference. What does that mean?

My guess: The competition catches up, you lose all paying clients, and you get to apply for jobs at Wendy's...?

Or does it mean it's a trivial decision, as trivial as deciding what fast food joint to choose?

Guess we'll never know :(

This guy claims they are losing billions of dollars on free ChatGPT users:

https://nitter.poast.org/edzitron/status/1841529117533208936

Ed Zitron's analysis hinges on a lot of assumptions. Much of it comes down to the question of how much it actually costs to run a single inference of ChatGPT. That $20/month pro subscription could be a loss-leader or it could be making money, depending on the numbers you want to use. If you play with the numbers, and compare it to, say, $2/hr for an H100 currently on the front page, $20/$2/hr gets you 10 hours of GPU time before it costs more in hardware than your subscription, and then factoring in overhead on top, it's just not clear.

You’d need to know how much they are using for that. I only use the API and the $20 I bought a year ago aren’t gone yet.