OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has addressed growing criticism about the company’s shift from open-source to closed AI models during a Reddit Ask Me Anything session on Thursday. When questioned about why a company called “OpenAI” doesn’t open-source its models, Altman explained that the decision centers on what OpenAI is “good at” and the pathway to achieving safety thresholds for its AI technology.
Altman acknowledged that open source plays an important role in the AI ecosystem and praised existing open-source models. However, he emphasized that OpenAI sees “an important role in the world for powerful and easy-to-use APIs and services.” The CEO stated that given the company’s strengths, they see “an easier way to hit the safety threshold we want to hit this way,” referring to their closed-source approach. He added that the company is “pretty proud of how much value people get out of our services” and expressed hope to “open source more stuff in the future.”
The shift has been dramatic: OpenAI previously released the code for its GPT-2 model in November 2019, but has not released code for subsequent models, including the advanced GPT-4o and o1-preview models. This change has drawn significant criticism, particularly from Elon Musk, who co-founded OpenAI in 2015 alongside Altman before leaving the company’s board.
Musk has been vocal about his disapproval, tweeting in December 2022 that “OpenAI was started as open-source & non-profit. Neither are still true.” He filed a lawsuit against Altman and OpenAI in March 2024, claiming breach of contract and abandonment of the company’s original mission. After dropping that lawsuit in June, Musk filed a new suit in August alleging he was “deceived” into co-founding the AI firm.
OpenAI transitioned to a “capped profit” structure in 2019, a hybrid between nonprofit and for-profit models. The company defended its approach by publishing email exchanges showing that even early on, co-founder Ilya Sutskever had written to Musk that “as we get closer to building AI, it will make sense to start being less open,” to which Musk had responded “Yup.”
The open versus closed-source debate remains contentious in AI. Meta positions itself as an open-source champion with its Llama models, though the Open Source Initiative disputes whether Meta’s licensing truly qualifies as open-source. During the AMA, Altman also revealed that GPT-5 likely won’t launch this year.
Key Quotes
We also think there’s an important role in the world for powerful and easy-to-use APIs and services, and given what we are good at, we see an easier way to hit the safety threshold we want to hit this way.
Sam Altman explained OpenAI’s rationale for keeping models closed-source during the Reddit AMA, emphasizing that their API-based approach better aligns with their capabilities and safety goals.
As we get closer to building AI, it will make sense to start being less open. The Open in openAI means that everyone should benefit from the fruits of AI after its built, but it’s totally OK to not share the science.
OpenAI co-founder Ilya Sutskever wrote this to Elon Musk in an early email exchange, revealing that the shift away from open-source was contemplated from the company’s early days, with Musk responding ‘Yup.’
OpenAI was started as open-source & non-profit. Neither are still true.
Elon Musk tweeted this criticism in December 2022, shortly after ChatGPT’s launch, highlighting his view that OpenAI has abandoned its founding principles. This sentiment later led to his lawsuits against the company.
There is no single open source AI definition, and defining it is a challenge because previous open source definitions do not encompass the complexities of today’s rapidly advancing AI models.
A Meta spokesperson defended their Llama models against criticism from the Open Source Initiative, illustrating how even companies claiming to be open-source face questions about whether they truly meet traditional open-source standards.
Our Take
Altman’s explanation reveals a pragmatic calculation: OpenAI has chosen commercial viability and controlled deployment over ideological purity. The safety argument, while legitimate, conveniently aligns with business interests—closed models protect competitive advantages and justify premium pricing for API access.
What’s particularly telling is the historical evidence that this shift was always contemplated, undermining claims that it represents a betrayal of founding principles. The Sutskever-Musk email exchange suggests the “Open” in OpenAI was always more aspirational marketing than binding commitment.
The Meta comparison is instructive: even self-proclaimed open-source champions impose restrictions that purists reject. This suggests the industry is converging on a middle ground—neither fully open nor completely closed—that balances innovation, safety, and commercial interests. The real question isn’t whether OpenAI will return to pure open-source (it won’t), but whether regulatory pressure or competitive dynamics will force greater transparency than companies would voluntarily choose.
Why This Matters
This story highlights a fundamental tension in the AI industry between openness and control that will shape the technology’s future development. OpenAI’s shift from open-source to closed models represents a broader trend where leading AI companies prioritize safety concerns, competitive advantages, and commercial interests over transparency.
The debate has significant implications for AI democratization and safety. Closed models give companies greater control over potentially dangerous capabilities but limit researcher access and public scrutiny. Open-source approaches enable broader innovation and transparency but raise concerns about misuse.
The competitive dynamics are crucial: OpenAI’s closed approach has helped it maintain market leadership and justify its multi-billion dollar Microsoft partnership, while Meta’s open-source strategy aims to build ecosystem adoption and counter OpenAI’s dominance. How this plays out will determine whether AI development concentrates among a few powerful companies or distributes more widely.
For businesses and developers, this affects access to cutting-edge AI capabilities and the costs of implementation. The resolution of this debate will influence regulatory approaches, research progress, and ultimately who benefits from AI advancement.
Recommended Reading
For those interested in learning more about artificial intelligence, machine learning, and effective AI communication, here are some excellent resources:
Recommended Reading
Related Stories
- OpenAI CEO Sam Altman Hints at Potential Restructuring in 2024
- Sam Altman’s Bold AI Predictions: AGI, Jobs, and the Future by 2025
- OpenAI’s Valuation Soars as AI Race Heats Up
- Elon Musk Drops Lawsuit Against ChatGPT Maker OpenAI, No Explanation
- Elon Musk Warns of Potential Apple Ban on OpenAI’s ChatGPT
Source: https://www.businessinsider.com/sam-altman-why-openai-closed-source-ai-models-2024-11