Connect with us

Business

Why OpenAI caved to open source on the same day as its $300 billion flex (hint: it’s not just about DeepSeek)

Published

on



To judge by his social feeds, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman is a very happy camper, as his company notches one eye-popping success after another. The startup he co-founded in 2015 just raised $40 billion at a $300 billion valuation, the biggest funding round ever by a private tech company; everyone on the internet seems to be posting Studio Ghibli-style images courtesy of OpenAI’s new GPT-4o image generation model; and ChatGPT now has 500 million weekly users, up from 400 million last month. 

And yet, along with all this good news, Altman revealed Monday that OpenAI is making what appears to be a pretty big about-face in its strategy: In several months, Altman said, OpenAI will be releasing an open source model. 

The move would mark the first time the company has released a model openly since the launch of GPT-2 in 2019, seemingly reversing the company’s shift to closed models in recent years. Granted, the forthcoming model will not be 100% open — as with other companies offering “open” AI models, including Meta and Mistral, OpenAI will offer no access to the data used to train the model. Still, the usage license would allow researchers, developers, and other users to access the underlying code and “weights” of the new model (which determine how the model processes information) to use, modify, or improve it. 

Why the turnaround?

On its surface, the direct cause of OpenAI’s open source embrace might appear to come from China, specifically, the emergence of startup DeepSeek, which flipped the AI script in favor of open-source in January. But according to several AI industry insiders that Fortune spoke to, a broader, and more nuanced, set of factors is also likely motivating Altman’s change of heart on open source. As AI technology makes its way into businesses, customers want the flexibility and transparency of open source models for many uses. And as the performance gap between OpenAI and its competitors narrows, it’s become more difficult for OpenAI to justify its 100% closed approach–something Altman acknowledged in January when he admitted that DeepSeek had lessened OpenAI’s lead in AI, that OpenAI has been “on the wrong side of history” when it comes to open sourcing its technologies.

OpenAI needs a presence beyond the models

Naveen Rao, VP of artificial intelligence at Databricks, said OpenAI’s move is more about an admission that the AI landscape is changing. Value is shifting away from the models themselves to the applications or systems organizations use to customize a model to their specific needs. While there are many situations where a company might want to use a state-of-the-art LLM, an open weights model would allow OpenAI to have a presence in scenarios where customers to don’t want to use ChatGPT, for example, or the company’s developer API. For example, a financial company might not want their customer data to leave their own infrastructure and move to an outside cloud, or a manufacturing business might want AI embedded in factory hardware that is not connected to the internet. 

“Open source is not some curiosity, it’s a big part of AI usage,” he told me. “OpenAI wants to be a part of that through their brand and their models.” 

Rowan Curran, a senior analyst at Forrester Research focused on AI, agreed, saying that OpenAI’s return to open source speaks to AI’s increasingly-diverse ecosystem, from OpenAI, Google, Anthropic, Amazon to Meta to China’s Alibaba and DeepSeek, France’s Mistral, Canada’s Cohere and Israel’s AI21 Labs.

He said many enterprise companies are excited about open-source AI models — not just because of how accurate they are or how well they answer questions, but because they’re flexible. The fact that they are portable is key, he explained — meaning they can run on different cloud platforms or even on a company’s own data center, workstation, laptop or robot, instead of being tied to one provider. 

Curran also explained that releasing an open model could make OpenAI’s own services more appealing to its own enterprise customers. If OpenAI is building a project for a customer and needs to run some of their work within the company’s own data center or even smaller models, for example, they can’t do that with OpenAI models like 4o because those run off of cloud-based servers. “That limits their ability to provide an end-to-end solution from the cloud all the way to the edge,” whether that is a laptop, a smartphone, a robot or a self-driving car, he said. Similar to what Google does with Gemini (it’s largest closed model family) and Gemma (it’s smaller open model), OpenAI could have its own open solution without having to look at third-party open source models. 

A tricky balancing act

While Rao does not see an open source OpenAI model as a big reaction to the DeepSeek releases, the “DeepSeek moment” did show that Chinese startups are no longer behind in the AI race. 

“Many of us in the field already knew this,” he said. If OpenAI doesn’t target the open source community now, he added, “it will lose a lot of influence, goodwill and community innovation.” 

Previously, OpenAI had said that one reason they could not release open models is because Chinese firms would try to use their technology to improve their own models. In January, OpenAI released a statement that said “it is critically important that we are working closely with the U.S. government to best protect the most capable models from efforts by adversaries and competitors to take U.S. technology.” And in fact, while DeepSeek did not release the data it used to train its R1 model, there are indications that it may have used outputs from OpenAI’s o1 to kick-start the training of the model’s reasoning abilities.

As OpenAI now tacks towards open source again, it’s found itself trying to reconcile seemingly contradictory messages. Witness OpenAI Chief Global Affairs Officer Chris Lehane’s LinkedIn post  on Monday: “For US-led democratic AI to prevail over CCP-led authoritarian AI, it’s becoming increasingly clear that we need to strike a balance between open and closed models. Open source puts powerful tools into the hands of developers around the world, expanding the reach of democratic AI principles and enabling innovators everywhere to solve hard problems and drive economic growth. Closed models incorporate important safeguards that protect America’s strategic advantage and prevent misuse.” 

“They’re definitely talking out of both sides,” Rao said,  describing OpenAI’s messaging as “it’s still really dangerous [to release open models] but we need to take advantage of the community that is building and has influence.” 

There’s also a commercial balancing act for OpenAI: It can’t release an open model that competes with its own paid ones. To target AI developers with influence, Rao suggested OpenAI would release a model that is big – but not too big. 

Throwing shade at Meta

If OpenAI’s strategic move to open source a model isn’t solely in reaction to DeepSeek, it may very well be about throwing shade at another big open source competitor: Meta is set to release the fourth iteration of its open source model family, Llama, at the end of this month. Llama has notably been released with an open license except for services with more than 700 million monthly active users–meant to limit companies like OpenAI building on it. 

“We will not do anything silly like saying that you can’t use our open model if your service has more than 700 million monthly active users,” Altman posted yesterday on X

“Meta has become the standard bearer for open source AI, at least in the west,” said Rao. “If they want to wrestle away some influence in the ecosystem, they have to take on Meta.” 

However, Forrester’s Curran said that Altman’s vague comments aside, there is no reason to think that OpenAI’s open source model will be any more transparent–in terms of data or training methods, for example–than any other commercial open version from Meta or Mistral. 

“I expect it to be much more opaque and closed compared to other open models,” he said, “with significantly less transparency.” 

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Jeep maker Stellantis is already taking drastic actions to shut down some production following Trump’s tariffs

Published

on

Automaker Stellantis is temporarily halting production at a plant in Canada and a plant in Mexico shortly after President Donald Trump announced a 25% tariff on imported vehicles. The move will result in the temporary layoff of 900 U.S. employees.

Stellantis, which owns car brands like Jeep, Citroën and Ram, will be temporarily pausing production at the Windsor assembly plant in Canada for for the weeks of April 7 and 14. Operations will resume at the facility the week of April 21.

The company will also be temporarily pausing production at the Toluca assembly plant in Mexico for the month of April, starting on April 7.

Due to the production pause, there will be temporary layoffs at the Warren and Sterling stamping plants in Michigan and at the Indiana and Kokomo transmission plants and Kokomo casting facility in Indiana.

Stellantis plans to continuously monitor the situation to determine if further action is necessary.

In a email from North American Chief Operating Officer Antonio Filosa sent to employees, Filosa said that Stellantis will quickly adapt to the policy changes imposed by Trump. He noted that the actions that the company is taking “are necessary given the current market dynamics.”

“We understand that the current environment creates uncertainty,” Filosa wrote. “Be assured that we are very engaged with all of our key stakeholders, including top government leaders, unions, suppliers and dealers in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico, as we work to manage and adapt to these changes.”

Late last month Trump said he was placing 25% tariffs on auto imports, a move the White House claimed would foster domestic manufacturing but could also put a financial squeeze on automakers that depend on global supply chains.

Stellantis has also been dealing with some of its own challenges. In December CEO Carlos Tavares stepped down amid an ongoing struggle with slumping sales.

Stellantis’ North American operations had been the company’s main source of profits for some time, but struggles piled up last year, with the company citing rising competition and larger market changes.

In efforts to revive sales, Stellantis previously made a number of leadership changes in October, which included naming new heads of operations in North America and Europe.

In January the company announced plans to reopen an assembly plant in Illinois and build the next generation Dodge Durango in Detroit as it looked to resolve issues with the UAW.

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Gap, Nike and Levi’s took years to diversify from China. Now sky high tariffs on nations like Vietnam are ruining their strategies

Published

on

© 2025 Fortune Media IP Limited. All Rights Reserved. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy | CA Notice at Collection and Privacy Notice | Do Not Sell/Share My Personal Information
FORTUNE is a trademark of Fortune Media IP Limited, registered in the U.S. and other countries. FORTUNE may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website. Offers may be subject to change without notice.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

‘Fake news’—Tesla’s Elon Musk dashes investor hopes he may finally be leaving politics, insisting he’s not going anywhere

Published

on



  • Elon Musk denied rumors he would soon be leaving the Trump administration. When news leaked in Politico that Trump told his inner circle the Tesla CEO would soon return to the private sector full-time, shares in the beleaguered carmaker surged.

Amid all the grim news around Tesla, investors finally had cause to cheer on Wednesday. Politico leaked rumors that CEO Elon Musk would, at long last, return to run his business empire full-time, leaving his newfound love of politics behind.

Shares in the company reversed their losses, soaring on the hopes that President Trump had in fact told his inner circle that the entrepreneur would soon be gone just as the article reported. 

Not so fast, Musk countered—he wasn’t going anywhere. 

“Fake news,” posted the Tesla CEO, who only two weeks earlier proudly shared a glimpse of his new D.C. office as head of Trump’s government efficiency task force DOGE. In two brief words, he dashed hopes among his investors that his political career as cost-cutter-in-chief was all but over.

Hours earlier, Tesla shocked shareholders with its worst quarterly sales since the spring of 2022 almost three full years earlier. Not even the most pessimistic analyst forecast anything close to the 13% decline in volumes. 

It was the latest warning sign that Tesla and its core autos business was rusting away.

Musk staked his domestic political capital on Wisconsin race—and lost

Whether by coincidence or not, the report landed just shortly after Trump learned that Musk’s campaign to help Republicans win control of the Wisconsin state supreme court proved a complete disaster. 

The Tesla CEO splurged nearly $25 million in the belief that electing Brad Schimel would alter the very course of western civilization. 

“This is one of those things that may not seem that it’s going to affect the entire destiny of humanity,” Musk told a rally in Green Bay in all earnestness, “but I think it will.” 

It isn’t the first time the Tesla CEO has felt this strongly about a vote. Only two months prior, he told Germans that electing the nationalist far-right AfD into power would determine the fate of Europe, if not the entire world: “I do not say it lightly when I think the future of civilization could hang on this election.” 

Instead, AfD came second, and Musk accused the country of “suicidal empathy.” Just as with the AfD, Musk’s endorsement of Schimel did not appear to have helped at all, and may have even hurt—a fact likely not gone unnoticed by Trump.

Amid the entrepreneur’s declining popularity and weeks of anti-Tesla boycotts that had owners afraid of leaving their cars unattended, investors are starting to say enough is enough.

Brief Musk stopovers to hold Tesla investors by the hand no longer cut it

On Wednesday, Wedbush analyst Dan Ives called Tesla “the most disruptive technology company in the world” thanks to Musk. Yet, even he is now warning the longer its CEO stays at DOGE, the more permanent damage he will inflict on Tesla’s brand.

Only last week, Ives had praised Musk for holding investors by the proverbial hand during a Tesla meeting, in which he promised staff they would make history by turning scarce resources into an infinitely sustainable abundance.

“The future we’re headed for is one where you can literally just have anything you want,” Musk told them in comments that also helped soothe shaky investor nerves.

But after Wednesday’s dreadful delivery figures, Ives is seemingly no longer satisfied with brief Musk stopovers to rally the troops.

“With major protests erupting globally at Tesla dealerships, Tesla cars being keyed and a full brand crisis tornado now underway, this has turned into a life of its own and cast a dark black cloud over Tesla’s stock,” he wrote. “Musk needs to get his act together or else unfortunately darker times are ahead for Tesla with today’s disaster Q1 delivery number a stark reminder.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.