Agree. I didn't want to moralize, just wanted to point out it's a shrewd business move. It's rather anticompetitive, though that is hard to prove in such a dynamic market. Who knows, we may soon be calling it 'antitrust'.
> The company's investors pressured it to grow very fast to obtain first-mover advantage. This rapid growth was cited as one of the reasons for the downfall of the company.
IMO, selling at a loss to gain market share only makes sense if there are network effects that lead to a winner-takes-all situation. Of which there are some for ChatGPT (training data when people press the thumbs up/down buttons), but is that sufficient?
If engineers are getting into AI development through OpenAI, they're using tools and systems within the OpenAI ecosystem.
Daily on HN there's a post on some AI implementation faster than chatgpt. But my starting point is OpenAI. If you can capture the devs, especially at this stage, you get a force multiplier.
