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

Summers warns U.S. likely headed to recession, 2 million jobless

Published

on



Former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers warned that the U.S. is now likely headed toward a recession, with potentially 2 million Americans put out of work, thanks to the tariff increases now in train.

“It’s more likely than not that we’re going to have a recession — and in the context of a recession, we’ll see an extra 2 million people be unemployed,” Summers said on Bloomberg Television’s Wall Street Week with David Westin. “We’ll see losses in household income” of $5,000 per family or more, he said.

There will be “very important choices in the weeks ahead” with regard to tariff plans by President Donald Trump that exceed even those of 1930 that “made the depression great,” said Summers, a Harvard University professor and paid contributor to Bloomberg TV. It would be wise to be “backing off the policies that have been announced,” he said.

Financial markets are “speaking with incredible clarity” about the impact of the tariffs, Summers said — highlighting that stocks have been surging on any headlines suggesting relief, and plunging on news suggesting the levies will go ahead.

Follow The Big Take daily podcast wherever you listen.

“We’re very likely, in the context of a recession, to see markets reach levels significantly below their current level,” Summers said. “I’d be surprised if the bottom is yet in with respect to this phase and markets,” he also said.

A U.S. economic downturn would have various other negative effects, he noted, including a wider budget deficit. “There will be financial distress that will affect higher-risk companies and also higher-risk countries in the global economy.”

Market ‘Alarm’

While it’s “hard to know” about the risk of an economic slump morphing into a financial crisis, the former Treasury chief highlighted the tightening in regulations since the 2007-09 meltdown, which was directed at ensuring financial firms are well capitalized and that the system’s so-called plumbing was functional. Deputy Treasury Secretary Michael Faulkender earlier Tuesday said that “liquidity continues to flow” and there were no “impediments” despite the market volatility.

“I’m less worried about the internal integrity of markets than I am by the external message that markets are sending — which I think is one of alarm,” Summers said. In the absence of some corporate executives and academic leaders speaking up about their concerns with policy actions, markets are “such an important signal of where things are going,” he said.

For the first time, the U.S. is facing a recession caused by its own policy actions, he indicated. “There is nothing in the outside world that is causing this challenge. It is induced by the words and deeds of President Trump and his administration,” he said. “I don’t know that there really is a historical precedent for what’s being done now.”

“There would be a substantial resumption of normality” in the economy if the government backs off on its “policy errors,” he said.

‘B’ Student

“There’s nothing complicated about this,” Summers also said.  It is “introductory economics” that the imposition of a huge tax hike on the middle class, clouded with uncertainty, damages businesses and forces the economy downwards, Summers said. “Any ‘B’ student will know that the answer to that is that it’s a supply shock that raises prices and raises unemployment.”

It will be “enormously costly for the United States and for the world economy” if Washington jacks up tariff rates back to pre-World War II levels, Summers said. “The losses to markets, if all of this were sure to be implemented, would be many trillion dollars. And the stock market only measures a very small fraction of the losses to the economy from policies of this kind.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Treasuries typically provide safe haven, but bond yields are spiking again as investors debate the Fed’s next move

Published

on



  • It’s been rough for most Americans’ 401(k)s since Trump unveiled his chart of reciprocal tariffs in the Rose Garden last week. The initial decline in the benchmark 10-year yield might have offered hope to homebuyers and sellers yearning for lower mortgage rates, but rates have remained elevated. The average fixed rate on a 30-year mortgage is still above 6.6%.

President Donald Trump’s sweeping reciprocal tariffs sparked chaos in the stock market, but bonds have also been on a wild ride. Amid one of Wall Street’s worst equity sell-offs in recent history, investors piled into safe-haven assets like Treasuries last week, but the apparent reversal of that trade means the ultimate impact on mortgages and other common borrowing costs for Americans remains unclear.

Early Monday, the yield on the benchmark 10-year Treasury note fell below 4% for the first time since October, down from about 4.8% in early January. That sharply reversed during a volatile trading session, however, as a rush out of bonds caused yields across all maturities to increase by at least 20 basis points, per Bloomberg. As of Tuesday afternoon, the 10-year yield approached the 4.30% mark as stocks pared back early gains to close in the red.

There’s been plenty of competing theories thrown out by market watchers for this dramatic retracement in yields as stocks and bonds curiously decline simultaneously.

“Everyone is trying to assign a narrative to why there was a big rise in Treasury yields yesterday,” Bill Merz, head of capital markets research at the U.S. Bank Asset Management Group, said Tuesday, “and the answer is people don’t know.”

There are a few straightforward explanations likely at play, though. Clearly, investors rushed to safety last week by selling stocks and buying Treasuries. It’s only natural, Merz said, for traders to partially unwind those positions.

“Thus, we’re seeing the bounce in Treasury yields,” he said.

Mortgage rates remain high as yields whipsaw

Yields, which represent an investor’s annual return, rise as bond prices fall—and vice versa. The former tends to happen if investors believe the Federal Reserve will be forced to hike rates, which makes the lower payments on existing bonds less attractive relative to new debt.

Therefore, it’s not surprising that yields have whipsawed as the market struggles to price what the Fed will do next. Through late February and early March, Merz noted, traders were expecting two-to-three quarter-point rate cuts. The turmoil after Wednesday’s tariff unveiling caused investors to suddenly price in four-to-five rate reductions, pushing yields downward, but some are less optimistic.

In a speech Friday, Fed Chair Jerome Powell indicated the central bank will continue its wait-and-see approach as widespread tariffs raise the prospect of dreaded stagflation, or rising inflation coupled with slowing growth. Investors had hoped for a sign the Fed stood ready to provide relief if the downturn persists, Merz said.  

“The market didn’t get that,” he said.

It’s been rough for most Americans’ 401(k)s since Trump presented his reciprocal tariffs. The initial decline in yields could offer hope to homebuyers and sellers yearning for lower mortgage rates, which are based on the 10-year Treasury.

In fact, a video reposted by Trump on his social media platform, Truth Social, suggested the president wanted to push investors to buy Treasuries, pushing yields lower and pressuring the Fed to cut its policy rate, which banks use to borrow from each other overnight.

The White House did not immediately respond to Fortune’s request for comment about the bond market’s movement this week.  

Even if the president were to deliberately tank the market to lower borrowing costs, the strategy could turn out to be ineffective. The average fixed rate on a 30-year mortgage still sits above 6.6% and has remained essentially flat in recent weeks, according to Freddie Mac

The spread between that rate and the 10-year yield is currently quite wide, Merz said. It can increase during periods of market stress, he added, one reason being that investors might sour on mortgage bonds relative to safer treasuries.

“That’s not helpful for consumers and borrowers,” Merz said. 

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Dave Portnoy estimates he’s lost $20 million after the Trump tariff-fueled stock market ‘bloodbath’ 

Published

on



As President Donald Trump’s tariffs roil global markets, some of the thought leaders and influential podcasters who backed the Republican’s campaign are voicing doubts.

Barstool Sports owner Dave Portnoy, hedge fund manager Bill Ackman and even Elon Musk are adding their voices to a number of congressional Republicans who have weighed in against the tariffs set to take effect on Wednesday.

Here’s a look at some of what they’ve said:

Dave Portnoy

“Welcome to Orange Monday,” Portnoy said on his “Davey Day Trader” financial livestream, just before markets opened this week, saying there’s “no political agenda” to his commentary, other than to make money.

After last week’s market plunge, Portnoy said he had lost $7 million “in stocks and crypto,” a figure he estimated on Monday was likely closer to $20 million, or up to 15% of his net worth.

But, Portnoy has said, he plans to stick with Trump, whom he has called “a smart guy.”

“I think they’re smarter than me when it comes to these tariffs. I also think he’s playing a high-stakes game here,” Portnoy said last week on his livestream. “I’m gonna roll with him for a couple days, a couple weeks, see how this pans out.”

Founded by Portnoy in 2003 as a free sports and gambling newspaper, Barstool has grown into a digital platform covering sports, lifestyle, and entertainment, with hundreds of millions of followers. Portnoy has been a loyal Trump supporter since first endorsing him in 2016, interviewing the president at the White House in 2020.

Joe Rogan

Rogan, one of the nation’s most influential podcasters who endorsed Trump on the eve of last year’s election, said in March that Trump’s feud with Canada was “stupid” and bemoaned the fact that Canadians “booed us over tariffs” during professional sporting events featuring teams from both countries.

Rogan has recently broken with Trump in other areas, including over wide-ranging deportations, referring to a recent operation to detain immigrants as “horrific.”

Just weeks before Election Day, Rogan taped a nearly three-hour podcast interview with Trump, an opportunity for the Republican nominee to highlight the hypermasculine tone that defined much of his 2024 White House bid.

Bill Ackman

The pro-Trump hedge fund manager warned Sunday on X that “we are heading for a self-induced, economic nuclear winter” unless Trump took a more deliberate approach, likening the full tariff activation “economic nuclear war.”

In another post later Sunday, Ackman assailed Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick as “indifferent to the stock market and the economy crashing.” The next day, Ackman apologized for his criticism claiming that Lutnick — previously the head of the financial firm Cantor Fitzgerald — could benefit from the tariffs because of its bond investments.

But the hedge fund manager also reiterated his concerns about Trump’s tariffs.

“I am just frustrated watching what I believe to be a major policy error occur after our country and the president have been making huge economic progress that is now at risk due to the tariffs,” he wrote on X.

Elon Musk

Even the billionaire top adviser to Trump on overhauling the federal government is expressing skepticism about tariffs, which he has said would drive up costs for Tesla, his electric automaker.

“I hope it is agreed that both Europe and the United States should move ideally in my view to a zero-tariff situation, effectively creating a free trade zone between Europe and North America,” Musk said in a video conference with Italian politicians.

On Fox News’ “Sunday Morning Futures,” White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said that Musk “doesn’t understand” the situation.

Musk fired back on Tuesday, calling Navarro “truly a moron” and “dumber than a sack of bricks.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Miami Select.