News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:OpenAI's Unit Economics by asyncadventure on Thursday January 29, 2026 @07:01AM (#46809047)
The discussion about Chinese vs US models misses a key enterprise reality: switching costs are enormous once you've built production systems around a specific API. Companies aren't just buying the model - they're buying reliability, compliance guarantees, and the ecosystem that reduces integration risk. Price matters, but in enterprise AI the "last mile" of trust and operational certainty often justifies significant premiums.
Re:OpenAI's Unit Economics by xmcqdpt2 on Thursday January 29, 2026 @07:18AM (#46809170)
OTOH most model APIs are basically identical to each other. You can switch from one to the other using openrouter without even altering the code. Furthermore, they aren't reliable (drop rates can be as high as 20%) and compliance "guarantees" are, AFAIK, completely untested. As anyone used the Copilot compliance guarantees to defend themselves in a copyright infringement suit yet?

I think you are right that trust and operational certainty justifies significant premiums. It would be great if trust and operational certainty were available.

Re:OpenAI's Unit Economics by senko on Thursday January 29, 2026 @07:10AM (#46809121)
Responses API is a commodity.

That's why OpenAI tries to push Assistants API, Agents SDK and ChatGPT Apps which are more of a lock in: https://senkorasic.com/articles/openai-product-strategy-2025

Funny thing is, even OpenAI seems to ignore Assistant/Apps API internally. Codex (cli) uses Responses API.

Re:OpenAI's Unit Economics by TSiege on Thursday January 29, 2026 @07:07AM (#46809102)
I think AI has the potential to break this model. It reduces switching costs immensely