OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says that he is not as 'well-suited' to be CEO of ...
CEO
Sam Altman
has admitted that he may not be the right person to lead OpenAI, if the company goes public. As reported by Bloomberg, in a conversation with reporters, Altman said he is 'not well-suited to be the CEO of a public company', despite overseeing one of the most ambitious infrastructure plans. Altman made the comment during a discussion about OpenAI's plan to invest 'trillions' of dollars into
computing infrastructure
. OpenAI CEO also believes that a public listing is outcome of OpenAI's growth, but shared that he may not be the right choice for the role of a
public company
CEO.
Sam Altman says he is not as 'well-suited' to be CEO of OpenAI
According to a report by Bloomberg, Sam Altman mentioned that OpneAI is of a path of public offering in the future. He also stressed on the fact that he will not be best suited as the CEO of a public company. 'I do think we have to go public someday, probably,' Altman said. But Altman also noted he is not as 'well-suited' to be CEO of a public company.
Along with this, Altman also revealed that OpenAI intends to invest trillions of dollars in compute infrastructure to support its AI ambitions. He emphasised that economists might call the plan 'crazy' or 'reckless,' but insisted the company is forging ahead.
'Let us do our thing,' Altman said, adding that OpenAI is working on a novel financial instrument to fund the massive outlay.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Could This NEW Collagen Blend Finally Reduce Your Cellulite?
Vitauthority
Learn More
Undo
For those unaware, OpenAI has already involved in the $500 billion Stargate initiative alongside SoftBank and Oracle.
Here's how much ChatGPT's mobile app has generated for OpenAI to date
OpenAI's ChatGPT mobile app has generated $2 billion in global consumer spending since its launch in May 2023, according to a new report from app intelligence provider Appfigures (as seen by TechCrunch). This figure is approximately 30 times the combined lifetime revenue of competing AI mobile apps like Claude, Copilot, and Grok. The analysis shows that the app has earned $1.35 billion so far in 2025, marking a 673% increase from the same period last year.
On average, the app is currently generating nearly $193 million per month. That figure is roughly 53 times greater than ChatGPT's closest competitor, Grok, which has generated about $25.6 million so far this year. Grok's estimated average monthly consumer spending stands at $3.6 million, or around 1.9% of ChatGPT's.
AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
13 minutes ago
- Mint
If AI takes most of our jobs, money as we know it will be over; what then?
Sydney, Aug 18 (The Conversation) It's the defining technology of an era. But just how artificial intelligence (AI) will end up shaping our future remains a controversial question. For techno-optimists, who see the technology improving our lives, it heralds a future of material abundance. That outcome is far from guaranteed. But even if AI's technical promise is realised – and with it, once intractable problems are solved – how will that abundance be used? We can already see this tension on a smaller scale in Australia's food economy. According to the Australian government, we collectively waste around 7.6 million tonnes of food a year. That's about 312 kg per person. At the same time, as many as one in eight Australians are food-insecure, mostly because they do not have enough money to pay for the food they need. What does that say about our ability to fairly distribute the promised abundance from the AI revolution? AI could break our economic model As economist Lionel Robbins articulated when he was establishing the foundations of modern market economics, economics is the study of a relationship between ends (what we want) and scarce means (what we have) which have alternative uses. Markets are understood to work by rationing scarce resources towards endless wants. Scarcity affects prices – what people are willing to pay for goods and services. And the need to pay for life's necessities requires (most of) us to work to earn money and produce more goods and services. The promise of AI bringing abundance and solving complex medical, engineering and social problems sits uncomfortably against this market logic. It is also directly connected to concerns that technology will make millions of workers redundant. And without paid work, how do people earn money or markets function? Meeting our wants and needs It is not only technology, though, that causes unemployment. A relatively unique feature of market economies is their ability to produce mass want, through unemployment or low wages, amid apparent plenty. As economist John Maynard Keynes revealed, recessions and depressions can be the result of the market system itself, leaving many in poverty even as raw materials, factories and workers lay idle. In Australia, our most recent experience of economic downturn wasn't caused by a market failure. It stemmed from the public health crisis of the pandemic. Yet it still revealed a potential solution to the economic challenge of technology-fuelled abundance. Changes to government benefits – to increase payments, remove activity tests and ease means-testing – radically reduced poverty and food insecurity, even as the productive capacity of the economy declined. Similar policies were enacted globally, with cash payments introduced in more than 200 countries. This experience of the pandemic reinforced growing calls to combine technological advances with a 'universal basic income'. This is a research focus of the Australian Basic Income Lab, a collaboration between Macquarie University, the University of Sydney and the Australian National University. If everyone had a guaranteed income high enough to cover necessities, then market economies might be able to manage the transition, and the promises of technology might be broadly shared. Welfare, or rightful share? When we talk about universal basic income, we have to be clear about what we mean. Some versions of the idea would still leave huge wealth inequalities. My Australian Basic Income Lab colleague, Elise Klein, along with Stanford Professor James Ferguson, have called instead for a universal basic income designed not as welfare, but as a 'rightful share'. They argue the wealth created through technological advances and social cooperation is the collective work of humanity and should be enjoyed equally by all, as a basic human right. Just as we think of a country's natural resources as the collective property of its people. These debates over universal basic income are much older than the current questions raised by AI. A similar upsurge of interest in the concept occurred in early 20th-century Britain, when industrialisation and automation boosted growth without abolishing poverty, instead threatening jobs. Even earlier, Luddites sought to smash new machines used to drive down wages. Market competition might produce incentives to innovate, but it also spreads the risks and rewards of technological change very unevenly. Rather than resisting AI, another solution is to change the social and economic system that distributes its gains. UK author Aaron Bastani offers a radical vision of 'fully automated luxury communism'. He welcomes technological advances, believing this should allow more leisure alongside rising living standards. It is a radical version of the more modest ambitions outlined by the Labour government's new favourite book – Abundance. Bastani's preferred solution is not a universal basic income. Rather, he favours universal basic services. Instead of giving people money to buy what they need, why not provide necessities directly – as free health, care, transport, education, energy and so on? Of course, this would mean changing how AI and other technologies are applied – effectively socialising their use to ensure they meet collective needs. Proposals for universal basic income or services highlight that, even on optimistic readings, by itself AI is unlikely to bring about utopia. Instead, as Peter Frase outlines, the combination of technological advance and ecological collapse can create very different futures, not only in how much we collectively can produce, but in how we politically determine who gets what and on what terms. The enormous power of tech companies run by billionaires may suggest something closer to what former Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis calls 'technofeudalism', where control of technology and online platforms replaces markets and democracy with a new authoritarianism. Waiting for a technological 'nirvana' misses the real possibilities of today. We already have enough food for everyone. We already know how to end poverty. We don't need AI to tell us. (The Conversation) SCY SCY
Hans India
13 minutes ago
- Hans India
Meta Set to Launch Hypernova AR Glasses in September at $800 Price Point
Meta is preparing to take a major leap in wearable technology with the upcoming launch of its first smart glasses equipped with a display. According to a Bloomberg report, the device—codenamed Hypernova—is expected to make its debut in September 2025 at a starting price of around $800. This price tag marks a surprising shift from earlier expectations. Initial estimates had suggested Meta might launch Hypernova at more than $1,000, with some predictions going as high as $1,400. By choosing to lower the cost, Meta is aiming to make the product more accessible to early adopters, even if it means thinner profit margins in the short term. Designer frames and prescription lenses are likely to cost extra, but the entry price itself will be considerably more affordable than once feared. Unlike a full-fledged augmented reality headset, Hypernova is being positioned as a bridge device—something between lifestyle smart glasses and the future of true AR headsets. Early details suggest the glasses will feature a small display embedded in the right lens, enabling wearers to view notifications, alerts, and lightweight applications without needing to check their phones. A key part of the system will be Meta's neural wristband, a technology the company has been refining for several years. This wristband interprets signals from the wearer's wrist, allowing subtle hand movements to function as commands. By combining this control method with the glasses' display, Meta is offering a more intuitive, button-free user experience. The timing of this launch comes as competition in the AR/VR space heats up. Apple's Vision Pro, which launched in 2024 at $3,499, has drawn criticism for its heavy design, steep cost, and limited content library. Positioned as a mixed reality headset, the Vision Pro is marketed toward professionals and enthusiasts rather than everyday consumers. Reports suggest sales have been modest, and Apple appears to be pacing itself until it can deliver a lighter, more affordable version later this decade. Meta, however, seems to be taking a different approach. Instead of chasing ultra-premium features, the company is focusing on practicality and accessibility. Hypernova is unlikely to rival the Vision Pro in terms of immersive cinema-like experiences, but it could resonate with users looking for convenience in daily life—such as quick access to notifications, navigation, and productivity tools without needing to reach for a phone. This strategy also builds on Meta's previous experiments in wearable tech. Its collaboration with Ray-Ban produced glasses that captured photos, videos, and streamed audio, but those products leaned more toward lifestyle accessories. Hypernova pushes the concept further by integrating a display and a new control system, positioning it as a more serious step into AR. For consumers, Hypernova's launch may represent the first widely affordable opportunity to experience augmented reality in everyday life. Whether it evolves into a mainstream device or remains a niche product will depend heavily on Meta's long-term app ecosystem, updates, and user support.
Mint
27 minutes ago
- Mint
Meta's new Hypernova AR glasses could launch next month, may cost as much as iPhone 17
Meta is looking to launch its first-ever smart glasses with a display next month, and we now have the first leaks about the price of the upcoming product. As per a report by Bloomberg's Mark Gurman, the new glasses, which are being dubbed 'Hypernova' internally, will now have a lower starting point compared to the $1000 price tag earlier expected. Notably, Meta's Ray-Ban glasses cost around $200–$400, but during the development of its new model, Meta had planned to charge at least $1000 for Hypernova, with some discussions even considering a price as high as $1400. Meta's earlier pricing would have meant that the new smart glasses cost even more than the iPhone 16 base and Plus variants. However, the tech giant is now said to have found a way to cut down the pricing of its smart glasses to around $800. The supposed reduction in starting price is being attributed to Meta's willingness to accept lower margins in order to boost demand for its new product. Gurman, however, warns that different styling options and prescription lenses could still push the price up steeply. The new Hypernova glasses are a precursor to full-blown augmented reality glasses, with the upcoming product likely to feature a small screen for mini apps and alerts on the right lens, while also being controllable via a neural wrist accessory — the same one last seen with Meta's Orion AR prototypes. Gurman has previously detailed that the AR glasses will show a boot screen when starting, with logos for Meta and its partners like Qualcomm. On the home screen, users will see circular icons laid out horizontally, similar to the layout seen on Apple devices or Meta's Quest mixed reality headset. The glasses are also likely to come with dedicated apps for taking pictures, viewing them and accessing maps. There could also be support for notifications from phone apps, including Meta's own suite of apps like Messenger and WhatsApp. Similar to other Meta devices, the new glasses are said to run on a highly customised version of Android, though there isn't expected to be any app store on them yet.
