Again you seem to be on the dark side with this article Enrique. I managed to follow one of the sources making this argument, it led to the link below. What I would say about this is that they are making evaluations from the outside looking in, they are not getting OpenAi themselves to make the claims they are making. As I've written, I believe ChatGPT, at least v3.5, is solar powered. Therefore none of the conventional cost analyses apply. The other company identifed in the source of the source that I could access, that you linked to, is a competitor of OpenAi, Microsoft, who I've pointed out could be made redundant tomorrow by ChatGPT automating Ubuntu, which would leave windows standing, if it was to happen. I've explained how ChatGPT can assist developers create extensions of it, to create bots in any environment, Ubuntu is no exception, and our machines are easy for it to interface to, especially if we want it to, as we might with fully automated Ubuntu. I've also explained how the training of ChatGPT for the foreseeable future is already fully automated, just by being interfaced to the public, it can learn everything it needs to know for the future from the public interface. I've explained how also any company or community can generate unlimited valuable revenue including fuel that functionally replaces fossil fuels, with hydrogen backup and crytpocurrency generation in their solar installation, but companies and communities operating on this strategy, which is the empowerment of communities as opposed to empowerment of governments and corporates, run the risk of simply falling foul of SEC, as even one of the biggest hydrogen corporates in the US, Plug power, has found.

The competition between Microsoft and OpenAi, is literally one of Microsoft, a mathematically negative powered, profit driven entity, seeing the writing on the wall that OpenAi, a mathematically positive powered, non profit requiring entity, about to finish it off. OpenAi will easily win this competition, how can anything, or any entity which has bills or shareholders to pay, compete with one that not only has none, but the resources to scale up at no cost?

This is why your story looks a little like the publicity we saw generated about proof of work token generation, that it was somehow bad for the environment, even when it is entirely solar powered.

Solar power, put to any use at all, has to have a net effect of temperature reduction. But it can never be had at profit, as I've also explained a zillion times.

I wish you could take this in, and understand it Enrique.

Btw, the other source I tried to follow, alleging massive operating costs of OpenAi, was the New York times, associated with you know who A..z..n, another competitor of it, probably threatened by it, but I couldn't get through their paywall, to confirm what they were saying.

What was that I recall you saying, that all things should be charged for? Is it good, that researchers can't even access the misinformation spouted, in order that we can show why they are wrong? Really, Enrique?

This was the source I did manage to access: https://www.theinformation.com/articles/microsoft-readies-ai-chip-as-machine-learning-costs-surge?irclickid=05myu-3p2xyPTTzU4TwzTyBJUkFWe93nlzoF0g0&irgwc=1&utm_source=affiliate&utm_medium=cpa&utm_campaign=10078-Skimbit+Ltd.&utm_term=futurism.com