No, but for industrial and business uses yes. You'd start to see a lot more robots used for warehouses, deliveries, restocking, cleaning, preparing food, etc.
OpenAI actually does have two excellent OSS models. Not Anthropic. Not that OpenAI is 'open' per se, but more so than Anthropic. Also see the Codex vs Claude Code extensibility.
They are far from excellent and they were open sourced due to the mounting pressure for calling themselves "Open" AI and not doing anything open. At the time, they also had Chinese competitors wiping the market value of many stocks (NVidia, etc.) after releasing true OSS models that performed as good as SOTA models and they had to retaliate. I don't know of anyone who uses those OSS models in production instead of Qwen series or DeepSeek.
Ghostty calls itself "feature rich" but only added cmd+F / find functionality a few months ago. Makes me wonder what other basic functions it's missing.
What this confirms is that it was never about Anthropic's terms. The administration has a bigger issue with Anthropic and that was just an excuse to ditch them. What exactly the issue was I'm not sure. Maybe OAI paid off the right people.
I don't think it does. It could just as well show openai accepted terms which are unacceptable for anthropic.
If they say "we define mass surveillance as flagging terrorist-looking people automatically with the Family Guy approach, but it's ok if a person types a name to look it up" then you can say "we agreed not to have mass surveillance by AI" or "that's still mass surveillance and we disagree with it".
Give Sam Altman's prior experience with worldcoin, I'm inclined to think he doesn't give a dime about mass surveillance.
1) This is by any source I can find, incorrect. Twitter had ~8,000 employees when Musk bought it. After layoffs that was trimmed to a low of around 1,500 employees (19%), and today it has around 2,800 employees.
Also worth mentioning that a lot of Twitter's products are built on X.ai which has 1,200 core employees on Grok with 3,000+ on the Datacenter build-out side.
Also if you put a product in maintenance mode you can easily get away with a fraction of your devs. Most people are at all times working on some definition of something new
Also have to consider that it’s now private which removes the pressure of having to show any semblance of a profit or, critically, share usage or advertising statistics which could (and probably are) down dramatically since the acquisition. Being private allows the fictitious storyline to persist that “we’re doing great and everyone is using our products.”
Reading such obvious LLM-isms in the announcement just makes me cringe a bit too, ex.
> We optimize for speed users actually feel: responsiveness in the moments users experience — p95 latency under high concurrency, consistent turn-to-turn behavior, and stable throughput when systems get busy.
reply