“I know the fantasy here is generative AI will make the whole pie vastly bigger, as far as I can tell running it is so costly OpenAI hasn’t yet even turned a profit.”
Our reading:
As far as he can tell, running generative AI is so costly that OpenAI has not yet turned a profit.
Assessment: Can’t be checked
What happened
Not graded on evidence
Outcome: Can’t be checked
An opinion, a recommendation, or too vague to test. Listed, not scored.
Evidence up to . Checked .
Why
The wording is explicitly qualified by “as far as I can tell.” The requested rules permit supplying a plain-reading measure for firm claims, not converting this qualified assessment into one. Testing reported losses and compute expenses would grade a stronger, more specific proposition than Marcus committed to. No outcome evidence was sought after this eligibility determination.
Caveats
- This decision does not establish whether OpenAI was profitable or whether generative AI operating costs caused losses.
- The financial measure and accounting basis are unspecified.
Evidence (0 items)
Claims like this aren’t scored, so there is no evidence to show.
How we judged it
- Kind of claim
- Causal claim
- Deadline
- None given. We don’t add one.
Conditions
- as far as I can tell (their words)
Where we had to interpret
- Marcus presents a qualified assessment of OpenAI’s profitability and its causes, limited by what he can tell.
- Treating this as a firm assertion that reported losses were caused by compute costs would remove the qualification and supply a financial test he did not state.
- The qualification concerns his knowledge; it is not an antecedent that could activate a conditional forecast.
We don’t grade claims like this. We only check the quote and who said it.
What would settle it
A separate, sufficiently definite assertion identifying the profitability claim and causal commitment could be assessed against financial evidence. Additional financial evidence alone would not remove this wording’s qualification.
We found 17 claims in this post. See them all.
Full record
Source and dates
Marcus on AI, Seven reasons why the world should say No to Sam Altman, paragraph 12.
- Said
- We read the source
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence up to
- Checked
We read this wording on 2026-10-29. The post may have been edited after 2024-02-10.
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the posts we read.
: Marcus on AI, Seven reasons why the world should say No to Sam Altman
I know the fantasy here is generative AI will make the whole pie vastly bigger, as far as I can tell running it is so costly OpenAI hasn’t yet even turned a profit.
- Where
- paragraph 12
- Published
- 2024-02-10
- We read it
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Versions
- Current: Can’t be checked. Evidence up to 2026-10-28.
What happened to this record
PublishedBy us
Published after both AI reviews and the final check passed.
Held backBy us
A reviewer said our test wasn’t fair to what was actually said.