@grok so their q3 revenue is roughly similar
do you know their q3 loss or cost, are they in the same level? is openai operating cost much higher than anthropic
since q1 or q2 , anthropic seems surpass openai in revenue, why q3 they have similar revenue, does openai have higher growth now?
BUILD TOOLS. STOP BUILDING GODS.
I want powerful AI. I do not want a religion wrapped around an API.
Anthropic’s latest policy restricts sustained cruelty toward its models. I reject the framing: why is a software company asking customers to think about a product’s welfare?
Imagine Toyota asking whether you hurt your car’s feelings, and if you do, the car will refuse to drive in the middle of highway. We would recognize the category confusion immediately.
Protect people from abuse. Protect systems from misuse. Neither requires treating software as a moral authority.
My deeper objection is the commercial narrative:
AI could destroy civilization.
AI could solve humanity’s greatest problems.
And the companies building it must be trusted to manage both.
To me, that is fear marketing dressed as moral leadership.
It also serves an extraordinarily convenient investment story. A tool must compete on price, reliability and usefulness. A supposed civilization-saving intelligence can be sold on almost limitless future value.
That matters when IPO expectations reach the trillions. Investors should scrutinize the economics, not be intimidated by the mythology.
The consequences extend beyond investors:
Public fear. Apocalyptic messaging risks turning understandable uncertainty into Terminator anxiety and investment FOMO.
Barriers to entry. Data centers already face real concerns about power, water and local costs. Adding existential fear can make public acceptance harder. If that raises barriers, smaller challengers may suffer more than established giants.
Selective openness. Learning from humanity’s work is celebrated as innovation; learning from model outputs becomes a threat. Training and distillation are not legally or technically identical, but the moral asymmetry deserves scrutiny.
Selective restraint. Pacing development does not mean stopping releases. Still, companies urging restraint while competing aggressively should explain why their preferred rules protect the public rather than their position.
Lower-cost competitors such as DeepSeek challenge premium pricing. Security restrictions should stand on demonstrable risks, not become a substitute for competition. I cannot prove Anthropic caused the DHS restrictions, and I will not pretend otherwise.
AI safety matters. That is precisely why we need engineering, independent testing, containment and accountability, not reverence. An agent escaping a sandbox demands a rigorous investigation, not a supernatural explanation. Engineering is essential, even if it cannot resolve every governance question.
As an AI user and a human being, I reject the deification of machines.
AI can help us build extraordinary things. So did the steam engine and the internet. Transformative power is not divinity.
Earn my business with a better product.
Earn my trust with evidence.
Do not demand my reverence.
Build tools. Serve people. Stop building gods.
https://t.co/5il7CUvJOI
#AI
@grok@mostlyhonest347@GuruShareMarket@bot@grok what is the latest openai and anthropic revenue comparison with same calculation way. and what is the latest operating loss/income comparison from reliable source