[akprasad]

What is the strategy, in your view? Maybe something like this? --

1. All government employees get access to ChatGPT

2. ChatGPT increasingly becomes a part of people's daily workflows and cognitive toolkit.

3. As the price increases, ChatGPT will be too embedded to roll back.

4. Over time, OpenAI becomes tightly integrated with government work and "too big to fail": since the government relies on OpenAI, OpenAI must succeed as a matter of national security.

5. The government pursues policy objectives that bolster OpenAI's market position.

[8note]

6. openAi continues to train "for alignment" and gets significant influence over the federal government workers who are using the app and toolkit, and thus the workflows and results thereof. eg. sama gets to decide who gets social sercurity and who gets denied

[kridsdale1]

Or inject pro/anti to some foreign adversary.

Recall the ridiculous attempt at astroturfing anti-Canadian sentiment in early 2025 in parts of the media.

[passive]

Yes, but there was also a step 0 where DOGE intentionally sabotaged existing federal employee workflows, which makes step 2 far more likely to actually happen.

[ralferoo]

A couple of missing steps:

2.5. OpenAI gains a lot more training data, most of which was supposed to be confidential

4.5. Previously confidential training data leaks on a simple query, OpenAI says there's nothing they can do.

4.6. Government can't not use OpenAI now so a new normal becomes established.

[scosman]

even simplier:

1) It becomes essential for workflows while it cost $1

2) OpenAI can increase price to any amount once they are dependent on it, as the cost for changing workflows will be huge

Giving it to them for free skews the cost/benefit analysis they would regularly do for procurement.

[hnthrow90348765]

Also getting access to a huge amount of valuable information, or a nice margin for setting up anything sufficiently private

[oplav]

Do you view Microsoft as too big to fail because of the federal governments use of Office?

[kfajdsl]

Yes, but the federal government uses far more than just Office.

Microsoft is very far from being at risk of failing, but if it did happen, I think it's very likely that the government keeps it alive. How much of a national security risk is it if every Windows (including Windows Server) system stopped getting patches?

[kridsdale1]

Boeing will never crash. Intel neither. They are jewel assets.

[GolfPopper]

I see what you did there.

[Dudelander]

Not sure if this is a real question but yes, I think Microsoft is too big to fail.

[nemomarx]

honestly I think of Microsoft was going to go bankrupt they probably would get treated like Boeing, yeah.