[Ritewut]

It is subsidized by gov contracts. Everyone who has common sense immediately said the real money is Altman getting into the governments pants which is why he and Brockman lobby so hard. You take away those contracts and OpenAI is dead in the water.

[simonw]

Anthropic are apparently making more revenue than OpenAI, and their government contracts have famously been curtailed.

[nicce]

They are different things. Government money is very predictable and consistent, and based on different calculations that typical consumer-oriented sales. Profits are usually easier.

[bgirard]

SpaceX was said to be subsidized by gov contracts. Look at where that got it...

[Ritewut]

You say "... was said to be" as if it's a fairy tale. SpaceX was subsidized by gov contracts. That's just a fact.

[loandbehold]

Government contract is not a subsidy. It's a payment for a product or service provided to the government. Examples of subsidies are section 8 housing or USDA PLC. SpaceX providing launch services to the government is nothing like that.

[Ritewut]

Distinction without a difference as it pertains to the conversation. Most of the money SpaceX received from the government was under the COTS program where NASA gave SpaceX money to develop a product and then NASA would become a customer of that product. It is as close as you can get to a technical subsidy without it being technically a subsidy.

[spongebobstoes]

this just isn't true, openai is largely (probably 80%+) consumer revenue in 2025

[missedthecue]

What? You believe that if you remove government contracts they're selling tokens below cost?