Pundit ClaimsAI claims by Gary Marcus and Ed Zitron, with the evidence

Gary Marcus Marcus on AI Published

OpenAI, in deep trouble

We recorded 18 claims from this post. 9 were checked against evidence. 9 can’t be checked. 6 more are held. Read the post at its source.

Claims from this post (18)

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.

  1. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    “This was OpenAI’s best shot, post DeepSeek, to show that they are still the king.Instead, they swung and missed.”

    What we tested: GPT-4.5 was OpenAI's best attempt after DeepSeek to show it still leads, and it failed.

  2. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    “GPT 4.5 appears to be the system that was supposed to be GPT-5, relabeled in order to manage expectations downwards.”

    What we tested: GPT-4.5 appears to be the system intended as GPT-5, renamed to lower expectations.

  3. Assessment: SupportedSaid

    “And of course, there is still no GPT-5, even after two years, of hype, bullshit, and cryptic hints.”

    What we tested: OpenAI still has not released GPT-5 after two years of hype.

    What happened: OpenAI's CEO explicitly places GPT-5's public availability in the future shortly before the post. The roadmap distinguishes it from the impending GPT-4.5 release. (Sam Altman / OpenAI, )

  4. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    “GPT 4.5, vibes and all, are the best Altman’s got. He was bluffing the whole time.”

    What we tested: GPT-4.5 is the best Altman has got, and Altman was bluffing the whole time.

  5. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    “When he told us “We are now confident we know how to build AGI as we have traditionally understood it”, he was obviously fibbing.”

    What we tested: Altman was obviously fibbing when he said 'We are now confident we know how to build AGI as we have traditionally understood it'.

  6. Assessment: SupportedSaid

    “GPT 4.5 is hugely expensive.”

    What we tested: GPT-4.5 is very expensive.

    What happened: The same paragraph lists standard input at $75 and output at $150 per million tokens. Against the contemporary Anthropic prices in e2, those are premiums of 25 times for input and 10 times for output. (OpenAI, )

  7. Assessment: SupportedSaid

    “Scaling hasn’t gotten them —or anyone else — to AGI.”

    What we tested: Scaling has not brought OpenAI or anyone else to AGI.

    What happened: The evaluator recognized a major advance but explicitly rejected treating the tested o3 as AGI. The discussion also identifies failures on tasks easy for humans. (ARC Prize, )

  8. Assessment: UnresolvedSaid

    “DeepSeek led to a price war that cuts potential profits.”

    What we tested: DeepSeek triggered a price war that reduces OpenAI's potential profits.

  9. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    “OpenAI is likely still losing money on every prompt.”

    What we tested: OpenAI is probably still losing money on every prompt.

  10. Assessment: SupportedSaid

    “Many many top people have left (Sutskever, Murati, Schulman, recently, Amodei and Karpathy before, etc and many, many more).”

    What we tested: Many top people have left OpenAI.

    What happened: The individual accounts document eight senior departures during 2024, including Karpathy, Sutskever, Schulman, and Murati; the Leike section also identifies Dario Amodei as a former OpenAI employee. The article explicitly distinguishes Brockman's temporary leave, which is excluded. (Observer, )

  11. Assessment: SupportedSaid

    “Some have started serious competitors with similar IP.”

    What we tested: Some departed OpenAI staff have founded serious competitors with similar IP.

    What happened: The report identifies Dario and Daniela Amodei as Anthropic's co-founders and former OpenAI executives, and describes direct competition between the model families. (Reuters via Yahoo Finance, )

  12. Assessment: UnresolvedSaid

    “Because OpenAI’s burn rate is so high (perhaps on the order of a couple billion dollars a month), they have limited runway, even after last year’s massive financing.”

    What we tested: OpenAI's high burn rate, perhaps a couple billion dollars a month, leaves it limited runway despite last year's financing.

  13. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    “Altman’s credibility has diminished.”

    What we tested: Sam Altman's credibility has declined.

  14. Assessment: MixedSaid

    “Whatever lead OpenAI had two years ago has been squandered.”

    What we tested: Whatever lead OpenAI had two years ago has been squandered.

    What held: The developer reports a competitor matching o1 on reasoning tasks, supporting erosion of an uncontested technical lead. This does not establish parity on every capability. (DeepSeek-AI, via arXiv, )

    What did not: The report identifies ChatGPT as the leading app in its mobile usage comparison, alongside monetization. Its usage evidence contradicts the broad claim that OpenAI had lost its product lead. (Andreessen Horowitz, using Sensor Tower data, )

  15. Assessment: UnresolvedSaid

    “(And Elon is right that they don’t have all or most of the Stargate funding in hand).”

    What we tested: OpenAI and partners do not have all or most of the Stargate funding in hand.

  16. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    “If Masayoshi Son changes his mind about investing tens of billion of dollar in them, OpenAI will have serious cash problems.”

    What we tested: If Masayoshi Son backs out of investing tens of billions, OpenAI will have serious cash problems.

  17. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    “Altman was the right CEO to launch ChatGPT, but he may not have the intellectual vision to get them to the next level.”

    What we tested: Altman may lack the intellectual vision to take OpenAI to the next level.

  18. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    “In short, potential investors should be asking hard questions, both about Sam, as a technical manager, and about the company’s ability to deliver.”

    What we tested: Potential investors should question Altman's technical management and OpenAI's ability to deliver.

Held from this post (6)

These records did not pass every check, so nothing about them is published. Held is not a finding.