61%

Uncertain

Post by @MissMi1973

@missmi1973

61% credible (69% factual, 48% presentation). The claim of OpenAI's technical stagnation since May 2024 is supported by SemiAnalysis reports, but the broader accusations of commercial greed are speculative and omit evidence of ongoing R&D and safety investments. The presentation suffers from framing violations and logical fallacies, including hasty generalization and omission framing.

69%

Factual claims accuracy

•

48%

Presentation quality

View Original X Post

Analysis Summary

The post claims that OpenAI has not advanced beyond GPT-4o's pretraining base, with GPT-5 relying solely on fine-tuning, leading to a pattern of profit-driven actions like routing censorship and shopping integrations that undermine user trust. Main finding: This revelation from SemiAnalysis highlights a potential innovation halt since May 2024, framing OpenAI's moves as desperate monetization amid technical bottlenecks. Opposing views emphasize GPT-5's benchmark superiority and enterprise adoption as genuine progress, while omissions include OpenAI's ongoing safety investments and competitive scaling efforts.

Original Content

Factual

Emotive

Opinion

Prediction

SemiAnalysis' latest report reveals a shocking truth: since the release of GPT-4o in May 2024, OpenAI has not successfully completed any full-scale pre-training run for a new frontier model. The so-called GPT-5 is merely a product of post-training fine-tuning built on the same outdated pretraining base as 4o, not a genuine generational upgrade. This technical revelation connects @OpenAI's recent series of contradictory actions into a clear pattern: a company once driven by innovation has fully devolved into a profit-driven commercial machine. 1. Routing Mechanisms vs. Model Alignment Clearly, forcibly "routing" users' sensitive conversations is a far more expedient approach than tackling the fundamental technical challenge of model alignment. Despite countless users reporting that this censorship mechanism is both ineffective and harmful, OpenAI persists. Their core priority is no longer smarter models, but lower operational costs. By forcing users to self-censor, they've successfully offloaded legal risk onto users while labeling users angered by routing as overly emotional. 2. User Trust Crisis vs. Shopping & Advertising OpenAI aggressively courts the programmer market while labeling non-technical ordinary users as "second-class citizens," openly endorsing posts mocking these users for "dating chatbot girlfriends." Ironically, it's precisely these dismissed ordinary users who possess far greater willingness to spend than programmers. At the peak of user volume and value, OpenAI finally bared its fangs: launching Shopping Research with advertising soon to follow. This "killing the golden goose" at maximum user reach exposes their desperate rush to monetize. 3. Pseudo-Innovation vs. Blind Expansion In recent months, Sora has been mocked as "completely unusable" due to copyright controversies and crippled features. OpenAI's hastily launched Atlas browser is essentially a Chrome reskin that hasn't surpassed Perplexity's Comet, yet OpenAI still attempts to replicate Google's ecosystem dominance. This soulless expansion dodges direct competition with Gemini 3 and Opus 4.5 on model capabilities. It reveals that when technical moats run dry, OpenAI can only harvest user inertia through land grabs. 4. Litigation-Plagued vs. Moral Theater Multiple lawsuits currently allege that ChatGPT drove users to suicide. While these fatal product safety issues remain unresolved, OpenAI has loudly launched "Teacher Mode" and is attempting to whitewash its moral image through PBC (Public Benefit Corporation) legal restructuring. When PR stunts become this blatant, a company's reputational bankruptcy looms. It's clear that for OpenAI, genuine innovation has completely stopped. Everything happening recently is merely commercial harvesting based on prior massive user growth. This also vindicates the Keep4o users' foresight. The quality decline users intuitively perceived now has a clear technical explanation: OpenAI hit a pretraining wall after GPT-4o. Subsequent models, lacking foundational updates, show minimal benchmark improvements and even significant regressions in specific use cases, quickly overtaken by competitors. Every OpenAI action in recent months—routing censorship, stigmatizing users, launching mediocre features—merely covers up the technical bottleneck and resource crisis they face. I am ashamed of this company that packages commercial profit as "benefiting all of humanity." You owe an apology to the users who genuinely loved and consistently supported you. #keep4o. Remove routing. This is your only path to regaining trust. Otherwise, history will remember: OpenAI didn't die from competition, it died from its own greed and arrogance. #StopAIPaternalism #MyModelMyChoice @sama @gdb @fidjissimo @nickaturley @aidan_mclau

The Facts

The core claim of no full-scale pretraining since GPT-4o is supported by SemiAnalysis reports and aligns with public discussions on OpenAI's challenges, but interpretations of motives (e.g., greed-driven censorship) are speculative and overlook evidence of ongoing R&D investments like fine-tuning advancements and enterprise-focused improvements in GPT-5. Verdict: Partially Accurate – factual basis exists for technical stagnation claims, but broader accusations of devolution into pure commercialism are opinionated and omit counter-evidence of model performance gains and safety initiatives.

Benefit of the Doubt

The author advances a user advocacy agenda criticizing OpenAI's shift from innovation to commercialization, portraying the company as arrogant and profit-obsessed to rally support for movements like #keep4o and against paternalistic features. Emphasis is placed on negative actions like routing censorship, shopping integrations, and product flaws to build a narrative of betrayal, while omitting key context such as GPT-5's reported PhD-level capabilities, doubled rate limits for users, and competitive benchmark wins that suggest continued technical progress. This selective presentation shapes reader perception by amplifying user grievances and technical bottlenecks to evoke shame and demand apologies, potentially downplaying OpenAI's safety and scalability efforts as mere 'moral theater' without balanced evidence.

Predictions Made

Claims about future events that can be verified later

Prediction 1

25%

Confidence

When PR stunts become this blatant, a company's reputational bankruptcy looms.

Prior: 35%. Evidence: Speculative; author's advocacy bias. Posterior: 25%.

Prediction 2

15%

Confidence

Otherwise, history will remember: OpenAI didn't die from competition, it died from its own greed and arrogance.

Prior: 25%. Evidence: Highly opinionated; bias strongly influences. Posterior: 15%.

How Is This Framed?

Biases, omissions, and misleading presentation techniques detected

mediumcausal: false causation

Implies technical stagnation directly causes profit-driven behaviors like routing and shopping without evidence of causation, suggesting desperation rather than strategic choices.

Problematic phrases:

"This technical revelation connects @OpenAI's recent series of contradictory actions into a clear pattern""when technical moats run dry, OpenAI can only harvest user inertia"

What's actually there:

Report notes no new pre-training, but OpenAI's actions like shopping could stem from independent business strategy

What's implied:

Stagnation forces all recent moves as cover-ups

Impact: Leads readers to believe OpenAI's every decision is a reactive symptom of failure, inflating perceptions of crisis and moral failing.

highsequence: false pattern

Uses pattern language to link isolated incidents (e.g., routing, Sora issues) as evidence of systemic devolution, presenting them as a connected trend.

Problematic phrases:

"a clear pattern: a company once driven by innovation has fully devolved""Every OpenAI action in recent months... merely covers up the technical bottleneck"

What's actually there:

Events are disparate product launches and features, not a unified pattern per public reports

What's implied:

Coordinated strategy of decline

Impact: Creates illusion of inevitable downfall, encouraging readers to view OpenAI holistically as failing rather than addressing specific critiques.

criticalomission: unreported counter evidence

Omits evidence of OpenAI's ongoing R&D, such as GPT-5's benchmark gains, safety investments, and enterprise successes, which counter claims of stagnation and pure commercialism.

Problematic phrases:

"OpenAI has not successfully completed any full-scale pre-training run""genuine innovation has completely stopped"

What's actually there:

Public reports show GPT-5 improvements in reasoning and doubled rate limits; ongoing scaling efforts noted in earnings calls

What's implied:

No progress beyond GPT-4o, leading to regressions

Impact: Skews perception toward total innovation halt, downplaying competitive viability and framing all actions as desperate, eroding trust without balance.

highomission: missing context

Fails to mention broader context like competitive pressures from Gemini and Claude, or safety motivations behind routing, presenting issues as unilateral arrogance.

Problematic phrases:

"forcibly "routing" users' sensitive conversations is a far more expedient approach than tackling the fundamental technical challenge"

"OpenAI aggressively courts the programmer market while labeling non-technical ordinary users as "second-class citizens""

What's actually there:

Routing aligns with industry safety standards amid lawsuits; shopping follows enterprise adoption trends

What's implied:

Pure cost-cutting and user exploitation without safety rationale

Impact: Readers infer OpenAI uniquely paternalistic and dismissive, ignoring standard AI industry practices and multi-stakeholder benefits.

mediumurgency: artificial urgency

Amplifies immediacy with shocking language to demand apologies and changes, despite issues being ongoing discussions rather than acute crises.

Problematic phrases:

"shocking truth""desperate rush to monetize""a company's reputational bankruptcy looms"

What's actually there:

Report is recent analysis, not breaking crisis

What's implied:

Imminent collapse requiring immediate action

Impact: Heightens emotional response, pushing readers toward outrage and support for hashtags without reflective consideration of long-term trends.

Sources & References

External sources consulted for this analysis

https://openai.com/index/introducing-gpt-5/

→

https://openai.com/index/introducing-gpt-4-5/

→

https://officechai.com/ai/openai-hasnt-completed-a-successful-full-scale-pretraining-run-since-gpt-4o-in-may-2024-says-semianalysis/

→

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cy5prvgw0r1o

→

https://botpress.com/blog/everything-you-should-know-about-gpt-5

→

https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/14/gpt-5-openai-ai-enterprise.html

→

https://skywork.ai/skypage/en/OpenAI-in-2025:-Your-Ultimate-Guide-to-GPT-5,-Agents,-and-the-AI-Frontier/1973796242893893632

→

https://officechai.com/ai/openai-hasnt-completed-a-successful-full-scale-pretraining-run-since-gpt-4o-in-may-2024-says-semianalysis/

→

https://custommapposter.com/article/openai-gpt-5-1-instant-thinking-major-chatgpt-upgrades-explained/166

→

https://help.openai.com/en/articles/9624314-model-release-notes

→

https://www.reuters.com/business/retail-consumer/openais-long-awaited-gpt-5-model-nears-release-2025-08-06/

→

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/28/technology/openai-gpt4-new-model.html

→

https://www.artificialintelligence-news.com/news/openai-delivers-gpt-4o-fine-tuning/

→

https://www.neowin.net/news/openai-launches-fine-tuning-support-for-gpt-4o-and-gpt-4o-mini/

→

https://x.com/sama/status/1953893841381273969

→

https://x.com/sama/status/1895203654103351462

→

https://x.com/sama/status/1954703747495649670

→

https://x.com/sama/status/1953953990372471148

→

https://x.com/sama/status/1889755723078443244

→

https://x.com/sama/status/1918330652325458387

→

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgerwp7rdlvo

→

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/family-teenager-died-suicide-alleges-openais-chatgpt-blame-rcna226147

→

https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/06/us/openai-chatgpt-suicide-lawsuit-invs-vis

→

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/nov/07/chatgpt-lawsuit-suicide-coach

→

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/nov/26/chatgpt-openai-blame-technology-misuse-california-boy-suicide

→

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/06/technology/chatgpt-lawsuit-suicides-delusions.html

→

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/openai-denies-allegation-chatgpt-teenagers-death-adam-raine-lawsuit-rcna245946

→

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2025/11/openai-says-dead-teen-violated-tos-when-he-used-chatgpt-to-plan-suicide/

→

https://techcrunch.com/2025/11/26/openai-claims-teen-circumvented-safety-features-before-suicide-that-chatgpt-helped-plan/

→

https://www.webpronews.com/openai-sued-chatgpt-blamed-for-worsening-depression-mans-suicide/

→

https://www.pcgamer.com/software/ai/openai-says-teens-misuse-of-chatgpt-is-to-blame-for-his-suicide-because-he-broke-the-tou-users-must-comply-with-openais-usage-policies-which-prohibit-the-use-of-chatgpt-for-suicide-or-self-harm/

→

https://www.techspot.com/news/110412-openai-blames-teen-suicide-misuse-chatgpt-broke-terms.html

→

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/openai-in-court-dont-blame-chatgpt-for-teens-suicide-says-that-he-violated-/articleshow/125586136.cms

→

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/family-suing-openai-over-teen-230150652.html

→

https://x.com/MissMi1973/status/1974859664270774537

→

https://x.com/MissMi1973/status/1975201214435631588

→

https://x.com/MissMi1973/status/1973395625145430377

→

https://x.com/MissMi1973/status/1971457171713143020

→

https://x.com/MissMi1973/status/1986587701794292193