It’s so easy to sit on a high horse and dunk on OpenAI after literally everything they’ve done to make the world a better place. Seriously how many other companies have both the words “Open” and “AI” in their names? That should tell you something about their commitment to improving the world with AGI technology that puts 99% of people on this site in the Dollar Tree stockroom career track where they belong

You need a big "/s" after this. Or maybe just not post it at all, because it's just value-less snark and not a substantial comment on how hypocritical and harmful OpenAI is (which they certainly are).

But I already posted it so how could I not post it at all? Do any of us even have a reason to exist? Maybe Sam Altman was right all along

Can anyone say which of the LLM companies is the least "shady"?

If I want to use an LLM to augment my work, and don't have a massively powerful local machine to run local models, what are the best options?

Obviously I saw the news about OpenAI's head of research openly supporting war crimes, but I don't feel confident about what's up with the other companies.

Just use what works for you.

E.g. i'm very outspoken about my preferences for open llm practices like executed by Meta and Deepseek. I'm very aware of the regulatory caption and pulling up the ladder tactics by the "AI safety" lobby.

However. In my own operations I do still rely on OpenAI because it works better than what I tried so far for my use case.

That said, when I can find an open model based SaaS operator that serves my needs as well without major change investment, I will switch.

Why not vibe-code it using OpenAI

Just call it hacking, we don't need new names for coding without any forethought.

Who put you in charge of naming?

I'm not talking about me developing the applications, but about using LLM services inside the products in operation.

For my "vibe coding" I've been using OpenAI, Grok and Deepseek if using small method generation, documentation shortcuts, library discovery and debugging counts as such.

The Claude people seem to be quite chill.

Claude has closed outputs and they train on your inputs. Just like OpenAI, Grok, and Gemini (API), mistral…

Who’s chill? Groq is chill

Agreed. They're a bit mental on "safety" but given that's not likely to be a real issue then they're fine.

Given the growing focus on AIs as agents, I think it's going to be a real issue sooner rather than later.

“Safety” was in air quotes for a reason. The Claude peoples’ idea of “AI safety” risks are straight out of the terminator movies.

Wouldn’t you rather have a player concerned with worst case scenarios?

Defending against movie plot threats has been found not a good use of resources already 20 years ago in the war on terrorism.

https://www.schneier.com/essays/archives/2005/09/terrorists_...

These aren't worst-case scenarios. That would imply there was an actual possibility of it happening.

A: none of the above

claude and mistral seem to be in a good ethical place.

You actually can't fault llama either, as a standalone product. However it's still in Zuck Paradise

My AI strategy is still "No".

Amen