Checking the math behind OpenAI and Anthropic’s latest headlines
We recorded 6 claims from this post. 2 were checked against evidence. 4 can’t be checked. 4 more are held. Read the post at its source.
Claims from this post (6)
In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Recommendation or value judgment
“Clearly impressive. But as with so much else, it should be viewed with skepticism.”
Our reading: OpenAI's claimed result on the Erdős planar unit distance problem, though impressive, should be viewed with skepticism.
No horizon
Assessment: SupportedSaid
Observation
“The other big news per a scoop from Berber Jin at the WSJ, is that Anthropic is projecting its first (slightly) profitable quarter ever.”
Our reading: Anthropic is projecting its first, slightly profitable quarter ever, per the WSJ.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: The assessment relies on a full-text secondary account because the original WSJ report was inaccessible.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“The exact number is not given but that discount may well be bigger than the projected $559M profit.”
Our reading: Although the exact figure is not given, SpaceX's one-time compute discount to Anthropic may well be bigger than Anthropic's projected $559M quarterly profit.
No horizon
Qualifier: the exact discount figure is not given
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Observation
“Context matters, and it is unclear whether subsequent quarters will be profitable.”
Our reading: It is unclear whether Anthropic's quarters after the projected profitable one will be profitable.
No horizon
Assessment: ContradictedSaid
Causal claim
“The wildest stat I saw this morning was this: Nvidia is spending so much on circular financing its cash flow is headed towards zero.”
Our reading: Nvidia is spending so much on circular financing that its cash flow is headed towards zero.
No horizon Evidence as of
Limitation: This conclusion uses the ordinary meaning of circular financing as funding customers or partners.
Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid
Recommendation or value judgment
“Caveat emptor, IPO buyers.”
Our reading: IPO buyers should beware.
No horizon
Held from this post (4)
These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.
- Attribution is uncertain
- The two reviews read the claim differently
- The two reviews reached different assessments. Our reading, not assessed: OpenAI has not disclosed how many prompts it tried or how many failed, so the success rate is unknown.
- The two reviews read the claim differently