“The prices are not decreasing, the software is not becoming more useful, and the "next generation" model that we’ve been hearing about since last November has turned out to be a dud.”
Our reading, the sentence that was checked:
Generative AI prices are not decreasing, the software is not becoming more useful, and OpenAI's next-generation model is a dud.
Assessment: Contradicted Evidence as of
Where and when Ed Zitron wrote it
Where's Your Ed At, The Subprime AI Crisis, paragraph 56.
- Said
- Source observed
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence as of
- the cutoff for this assessment
- Assessment recorded
- assessment wyea-subprimeai-d90f9f-a1
We recorded 50 claims from this post. See every claim from this post.
The wording above is the version this site observed on 2026-10-28. The source may have been edited after 2024-09-16. This page does not claim the wording was captured then.
What the claim commits to
- Kind
- Observation
- Deadline, as the speaker wrote it
- None stated. This site does not add one.
- Deadline state when assessed
- No horizon
- Deadline state on 2026-10-29
- No horizon (the release’s reference date)
From the speaker
- The prices are not decreasing
- the software is not becoming more useful
- since last November
- has turned out to be a dud
Our interpretation
- I read the general price statement as covering publicly offered generative-AI model prices, including comparable API token prices.
- The comparison window begins in November 2023, the month named in the surrounding sentence, and ends on the post date.
- Useful improvements can include documented improvements on practical tasks, but a benchmark gain alone does not establish universal business value.
- Dud is an evaluative judgment without a supplied threshold. A documented price decrease can nevertheless refute the sentence's categorical factual price component.
- Customer API prices are not a claim about company revenue, losses, or spending, so metric_scope is null.
Counts as supported if: Comparable published prices show no decreases over the stated window, and practical capability evidence supports no useful improvement. The dud judgment cannot independently be scored without a supplied criterion.
Counts as contradicted if: A documented reduction in comparable published model prices refutes the categorical price statement, or documented practical capability gains refute a categorical absence of useful improvement.
Retrospective: these criteria were written after the outcome was public.
Current assessment
Was it true for the period described?
Outcome: Contradicted
The dated evidence goes against what the claim committed to, under the criteria frozen before grading.
Scored on a plain reading. The speaker named no measure for this claim, so it was judged on the reading an informed reader would take, stated below under our interpretation. Both reviews had to find that reading fair.
- Evidence as of
- Deadline state when assessed
- No horizon
- Assessment recorded
- Policy version
- 2026-10-28.7
Rationale
Under the ordinary broad reading, the price assertion is false. OpenAI documented GPT-4-family price reductions in November 2023 and GPT-3.5 Turbo reductions in January 2024. This refutes a concrete component of the combined claim. The narrower criticism that o1 was expensive has contemporaneous support. This outcome does not establish that o1 was exciting or that every application became more useful.
Limitations
- The result depends on the broad price scope; an o1-only reading would require a different assessment.
- Lower token rates do not guarantee a lower total bill for every workload.
- The subjective dud judgment is not scored.
Evidence (3 items)
Goes against the claim: OpenAI,
Input prices for the new model are reduced by 50%
Why it matters here: OpenAI announced lower input and output token rates for the updated GPT-3.5 Turbo offering. This directly contradicts the broad claim that model prices were not decreasing.
- Publisher
- OpenAI
- Kind of source
- Company disclosure: the company describing itself, not an independent finding
- Describes events of
- Public from
Goes against the claim: OpenAI,
GPT‑4 Turbo input tokens are 3x cheaper than GPT‑4
Why it matters here: The provider documented lower GPT-4 Turbo input and output prices, expressed per 1,000 tokens. This is another price decrease within the comparison window.
- Publisher
- OpenAI
- Kind of source
- Company disclosure: the company describing itself, not an independent finding
- Describes events of
- Public from
Context only: TechCrunch,
OpenAI o1 is also uniquely pricey.
Why it matters here: This contemporaneous review supports the narrower criticism of o1's cost. A more expensive new reasoning model does not establish that generative-AI prices generally failed to fall.
- Publisher
- TechCrunch
- Kind of source
- News report
- Describes events of
- Public from
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the sources this register covers.
: Where's Your Ed At, The Subprime AI Crisis
The prices are not decreasing, the software is not becoming more useful, and the "next generation" model that we’ve been hearing about since last November has turned out to be a dud.
- Where
- paragraph 56
- Published
- 2024-09-16
- Source observed
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Assessment versions
- Assessment wyea-subprimeai-d90f9f-a1: Current. Outcome: Contradicted. Evidence as of 2026-10-28. Public date not recorded.
Recorded events
Assessment publishedBy this site
First assessment published after both reviews and the final-text check passed.