How do I cancel my ChatGPT subscription?
help.openai.comThis is a good time to promote running your own models. I have been running my own models locally and I would wager a local model will meet 85-95% of your needs if you really learn to use it. These models have gotten great. For anyone wanting to get into this, the smartest models to run recently that is consumer friendly was just released, checkout Qwen3.5 the 27B and 35B variants. They are small and I recommend running full Q8 quants. The easiest way to run these without dealing with complex GPU is to get a mac. For the example I gave, a 64gb mac will handle it well. If you are really cash strapped then you can manage with a 32gb but will have to run with less resolution quants. If you are not cashed strap, then get at least a 128gb and if possible a 256gb. The models are so good you will regret not getting a better system. You can join the r/LocalLlama community in reddit to learn some more. But this is pretty easy. Grab llama.cpp, grab a gguf quant from huggingface.co - the unsloth quants are great - https://huggingface.co/unsloth/models
For non-Mac users:
A laptop with an iGPU and loads of system RAM has the advantage of being able to use system ram in addition to VRAM to load models (assuming your gpu driver supports it, which most do afaik), so load up as much system RAM as you can. The downside is, the system RAM is less fast than dedicated GDDR5. These GPUs would be Radeon 890M and Intel Arc (previous generations are still decently good, if that's more affordable for you).
A laptop with a discrete GPU will not be able to load models as large directly to GPU, but with layer offloading and a quantized MoE model, you can still get quite fast performance with modern low-to-medium-sized models.
Do not get less than 32GB RAM for any machine, and max out the iGPU machine's RAM. Also try to get a bigass NVMe drive as you will likely be downloading a lot of big models, and should be using a VM with Docker containers, so all that adds up to steal away quite a bit of drive space.
Final thought: before you spend thousands on a machine, consider that there are at least a dozen companies that provide non-Anthropic/non-OpenAI models in the cloud, many of which are dirt cheap because of how fast and good open weights are now. Do the math before you purchase a machine; unless you are doing 24/7/365 inference, the cloud is fastly more cost effective.
> there are at least a dozen companies that provide non-Anthropic/non-OpenAI models in the cloud, many of which are dirt cheap because of how fast and good open weights are now.
Oh yeah, seems obvious now you said it, but this is a great point.
I'm constantly thinking "I need to get into local models but I dread spending all that time and money without having any idea if the end result would be useful".
But obviously the answer is to start playing with open models in the cloud!
I agree but I still have that itch to have my own local model—so it's not always about cost. A hobby?
(Besides, a hopped-up Mac would never go to waste in my home if it turns out the local LLM thing was not worth the cost.)
Well they are doing that because of the nature of matrix multiplication. Specifically, LLM costs scale in the square length of a single input, let's call it N, but only linearly in the number of batched inputs.
O(M * N^2 * d)
d is a constant related to the network you're running. Batching, btw, is the reason many tools like Ollama require you to set the context length before serving requests.
Having many more inputs is way cheaper than having longer inputs. In fact, that this is the case is the reason we went for LLMs in the first place: as this allows training to proceed quickly, batching/"serving many customers" is exactly what you do during training. GPUs came in because taking 10k triangles, and then doing almost the exact same calculation batched 1920*1080 times on them is exactly what happens behind the eyes of Lara Croft.
And this is simplified because a vector input (ie. M=1) is the worst case for the hardware, so they just don't do it (and certainly not in published benchmark results). Often even older chips are hardwired to work with M set to 8 (and these days 24 or 32) for every calculation. So until you hit 20 customers/requests at the same time, it's almost entirely free in practice.
Hence: the optimization of subagents. Let's say you need an LLM to process 1 million words (let's say 1 word = 1 token for simplicity)
O(1 million words in one go) ~ 1e12 or 1 trillion operations
O(1000 times 1000 words) ~ 1e9 or 1 billion operations
O(10000 times 100 words) ~ 1e8 or 100 million operations
O(100000 times 10 words) ~ 1e7 or 10 million operations
O(one word at a time) ~ 1e6 or 1 million operations
Of course, to an extent this last way of doing things is the long known case of a recurrent neural network. Very difficult to train, but if you get it working, it speeds away like professor Snape confronted with a bar of soap (to steal a Harry Potter joke)
> there are at least a dozen companies that provide non-Anthropic/non-OpenAI models in the cloud
Do you have some links?
Also I assume the privacy implications are vastly different compared to running locally?
Throw a rock and you'll hit one... Groq (not Grok, elon stole the name), Mistral, SiliconFlow, Clarifai, Hyperbolic, Databricks, Together AI, Fireworks AI, CompactifAI, Nebius Base, Featherless AI, Hugging Face (they do inference too), Cohere, Baseten, DeepInfra, Fireworks AI, DeepSeek, Novita AI, OpenRouter, xAI, Perplexity Labs, AI21, OctoAI, Reka, Cerebras, Fal AI, Nscale, OVHcloud AI, Public AI, Replicate, SambaNova, Scaleway, WaveSpeedAI, Z.ai, GMI Cloud, Nebius, Tensorwave, Lamini, Predibase, FriendliAI, Shadeform, Qualcomm Cloud, Alibaba Cloud AI, Poe, Bento LLM, BytePlus ModelArk, InferenceAI, IBM Wastonx.AI, AWS Bedrock, Microsoft, Google
I use Ollama Cloud. $20/mo and I never come close to hitting quota (YMMV obviously).
They don't log anything, and they use US datacenters.
for privacy preserving direct inference: Fireworks ai nebius
otherwise openrouter for routing to lots of different providers.
openrouter, for example, there are models both open and closed
And if you don't want to buy a Mac? A 80 GB NVidia GPU costs $10,000K (equivalent to 30 years of ChatGPT Plus subscription) and will probably be obsolete in 5-7 years anyway. What are my options if I want a decent coding agent at a reasonable price?
I'm able to run the Unsloth quants on an ancient dual socket Xeon 1U server I keep around for homelab stuff. It has 8 DDR3 channels, which gives me about as much memory bandwidth as two channels of DDR5 :-/ But 16 sockets and cheaper prices. So it has 256gb in it right now. I have to run the minimum size Unsloth quant for the largest open weight models. They definitely feel a bit dazed. This machine can support up to 1.5TB of DDR3, which would allow me to run many of the largest models unquantized, but at 1/4 of the already abysmal speeds I see of ~ 1 Token / s which is only really usable with multiple agents running a kanban style async development process. Nothing interactive. That said, I picked up the hardware at the local surplus for $25 and it's vintage ~2010. Pretty impressive what this enterprise gear can do.
Power consumption? Don't ask. A subscription is cheaper.
> Power consumption
That’a the thing, at the end of it all power consumption will matter more for the end-user who doesn’t have money to burn away, because I suspect that power-consumption will, in the majority of cases, exceed the price of the HW itself in a matter of just a few months of intense use, let’s say a year.
Assuming models of a fixed size continue to improve in capability, continued advancement in semiconductors and optimization will reduce power consumption and/or improve performance over time. And used equipment will always approach the scrap price eventually. For me today, on scrap equipment, I get about 4 tokens / watt-hour, which is nominally ~$0.17 US but could run $0.40 after all the taxes and fees and surcharges. $0.10 / token. Ouch.
If I were to try to purpose build a rig for it, I would get an engineering sample Epyc/motherboard/ram combo from Aliexpress with 12 channels of DDR5 and as few cores as allowed me to still use all the memory bandwidth, and I'd run it at the lowest possible power and voltage settings with aggressive ram timings. A system like that can draw 1/3 of what my scrap rig draws, at full load. And has similar memory bandwidth to a high end Mac or GPU allowing it to crank out 5 - 10 Tokens / s on the largest models, which works out to 1/3 of a penny to 2/3 of a penny per token. But either way, Epyc or Mac is going to set you back $10k or more. Hopefully in a few years when they are scrap though...
Rent a H100 on Modal which scales down to zero when not in use - you can set the time out period.
Cold boot times are around 5m but if your usage periods are predictable it can work out ok. Works out at $2 an hour.
Still far more expensive than a ChatGPT sub.
Do you have some reference on what setup you're talking about? I'd like to integrate it into my IDE (cursor/vscode) - are there docs on such a setup?
Start here
https://modal.com/docs/examples/vllm_inference
or give this a go
https://modal.com/docs/examples/opencode_server
You get $30 free credits each month on Modal which is enough to play around (i have no affiliation, just think they run a great service)
I downloaded Ollama ( https://github.com/ollama/ollama/releases ) and experimented with a few Qwen models ( https://huggingface.co/Qwen/collections ).
My performance when using an RTX 5070 12GiB VRAM, Ryzen 7 9700X 8 cores CPU, 32GiB DDR5 6000MT (2 sticks):
So currently my sweet spot is "qwen3:30b-a3b" - even if the model doesn't completely fit on the GPU it's still fast enough. "qwen3.5" was disappointing so far, but maybe things will change in the future (maybe Ollama needs some special optimizations for the 3.5-series?).- "qwen2.5:7b": ~128 tokens/second (this model fits 100% in the VRAM). - "qwen2.5:32b": ~4.6 tokens/second. - "qwen3:30b-a3b": ~42 tokens/second (this is a MoE model with multiple specialized "brains") (this uses all 12GiB VRAM + 9GiB system RAM, but the GPU usage during tests is only ~25%). - qwen3.5:35b-a3b: ~17 tokens/second, but it's highly unstable and crashes -> currently not usable for me.I would therefore deduce that the most important thing is the amount of VRAM and that performance would be similar even when using an older GPU (e.g. an RTX 3060 with as well 12GiB RAM)?
Performance without a GPU, tested by using a Ryzen 9 5950X 16 cores CPU, 128GiB DDR4 3200 MT:
- "qwen2.5:7b": ~9 tokens/second - "qwen3:32b": ~2 tokens/second - "qwen3:30b-a3b": ~16 tokens/secondGPUs are not going obsolete anytime soon. the nvidia p40/p100 launched in 2016, 10 years ago and is popular in the local space. My first set of GPUs were a bunch of P40s from 3 years ago for $150 a piece. They at one point went up all the way to $450, but price is now down to $200 range. I think I have gotten my value from those and I suspect I'll still have them crunching out tokens for at least 3 more years. They still beat 90% of cpu/memory inference combo.
Indeed, the point is that it's going for 150$
My point being that no one should be buying expensive GPUs when you can pick up a few used ones to get started. But for the sake of discussion let's say you do get a blackwell pro 6000 that's now going for $10,000. I can assure you it will not be $150 10 years from now, with the falling price of dollar, demand for AI inference and hardware shortage, it might cost exactly the same 10 years from now...
What are my options if I want a decent coding agent at a reasonable price?
I'd even come from another angle.. What are my options if I want a decent coding agent, on the level of what Claude does at any given price? Let's say few tens of thousands of dollars? I've had a limited look at what's available to be run locally and nothing is on par.
Does not exist AFAIK. Even other labs struggle with Claude level performance in real world task. My experience is that no open model is close. You can get RTX 6000 Pro Blackwell (Max-Q is better for power is half). I have heard good things about Qwen3 coder next but I could not get tool calling to be high performance but it’s likely to be pebkac.
If you want to spend big bucks get h200 141 GB but honestly RTX 6000 pro is good enough till you know what you want. Workstation edition is good. It takes care of cooling etc.
Tbh even better is to just get model through cloud. If you want you can rent GPU. Then see if it’s what you want.
The gist of it is no matter the money you spend on hardware, you will not get the same quality you get from claude. Main question is then what can you run that's good enough? I haven't tested all there is available, but everything I did see does not come even close.
A Strix Halo with 128GB unified memory is less than $2k and the more suitable alternative to a mac. I'm pretty happy with my device (Bosgame M5).
the macs outperform it and I figure it's a better general purpose computer than strix halo. if budget is a problem, then a strix halo is a decent alternative.
Well a mac isn't really an alternative to a mac, or is it? ;)
Personally I'm not interested in having a mac as I work with linux. And yes, they outperform them, but only if you ignore the price. When comparing what you get for ~$2k, a Strix Halo is miles ahead.
Mac doesn't run Linux so in my books is a worse general purpose computer than a Strix Halo box.
A Strix Halo with 128GB unified memory is less than $2k
Where did you get that price? Wherever I looked it's around 3k euros which is around $3.5k
Directly from Bosgame.com, for ~1.7k€ in December. I see it's at $2.2k / 1.9k€ now.
why haven't I checked their site first is beyond me :) Thank you for this! You say you're satisfied, right?
Can you elaborate more on your use cases, models, setup,...?
I took my setup from here: https://github.com/kyuz0/amd-strix-halo-toolboxes
Still lot to learn, but after a while you have something like Qwen3-Coder-Next-Q8_0 running and - at least for me - it works quite well, both as ChatGPT like chat-interface using llama.cpp and as coding agent
I'm not really using them for coding (only played a little bit with minimax2.1), which is probably the most common use case here.
I mainly use them for deep work with texts and deep research. My main criterion is privacy, both for legal reasons (I'm in the EU and can't and don't want to expose customer's data to non-gdpr-compliant services) and wouldn't use US services personally either, e.g. I would never explore health related topics chatgpt or gemini for obvious reasons.
Technically I've set it up in my office with llama.cpp and have exposed that (both chat interface and openai compatible api) with a simple wireguard tunnel behind nginx and http auth. Now I can use it everywhere. It's a small, quiet and pretty fast machine (compiling llama.cpp is around 20 seconds?), I quite like it.
You can rent GPUs, this comes with a security, maintenance and performance overhead, but also has a few advantages.
But right now, a Mac is the easiest way because of their memory architecture.
Honestly you can run this on a 16GB VRAM GPU with llama.cpp. Just try it!
An even easier way to get into this is simply by downloading a program called LM Studio. You can mount a model and chat to it within 10-15 mins with no experience whatsoever, and no configuration at all.
That said, last time I tried local LLMs (around when gpt-oss came out) it still seemed super gimmicky (or at least niche, I could imagine privacy concerns would be a big deal for some). Very few use cases where you want an LLM but can't benefit immensely from using SOTA models like Claude Opus.
The financial barrier is kind of the opposite of "easy to run" to me.
As much as I love owning my stack, you'd have to use so much of this to break even vs an inference provider/aggregator with open frontier-ish models. (and personally, I want to use as little as possible)
As someone who desperately wants to use local models, I lament there is no way to use them on consumer hardware for serious coding work. I have a rtx 4070 super ti and I cannot run any large model with enough context and tps compared to a remote offering.
I have a 24GB Macbook Pro. I will note, do get the 'Pro' models, the Mac Mini and the Macbook Air do not have internal fans. The Macbook Pro has an internal fan, and the Mac Studio (bigger Mac Mini) has a fan. If you get a Mini, you might want to get one of those docks that cools the Mini. Your hardware will get very hot very quickly.
Also, because Apple in their infinite wisdom despite giving you a fan, very lazily turn it on (I swear it has to hit 100c before it comes on) and they give you zero control over fan settings, you may want to snag something like TG Pro for the Mac. I wound up buying a license for it, this lets you define at which temperature you want to run your fans and even gives you manual control.
On my 24G RAM Macbook Pro I have about 16GB of Inference. I use Zed with LM Studio as the back-end. I primarily just use Claude Code, but as you note, I'm sure if I used a beefier Mac with more RAM I could probably handle way more.
There's a few models that are interesting on the Mac with LM Studio that let you call tooling, so it can read your local files and write and such:
mistralai/mistralai-3-3b this one's 4.49GB - So I can increase my context window for it, not sure if it auto-compacts or not, have only just started testing it
zai-org/glm-4.6v-flash - This one is 7.09GB, same thing, only just started testing it.
mistralai/mistral-3-14b-reasoning - This one is 15.2GB just shy of the max, so not a TON of wiggle room, but usable.
If you're Apple or a company that builds things for Macs or other devices, please build something to help with airflow / cooling for the MBP / Mac Mini, it feels ridiculous that it becomes a 100c device I'm not so sure its great for device health if you want to use inference for longer than the norm.
I will probably buy a new Mac whenever the inference speeds increase at a dramatic enough rate. I sure hope Apple is considering serious options for increasing inference speed.
The Mac Mini does have a fan. It's very quiet, but it's there.
How are the Ryzen 395 with 128gb for running models these days?
Also interested.
No complaints here, I use a Framework Desktop with this chip. 32G given to RAM and the rest plays VRAM. Can use large models like 'gpt-oss:120b' fine. Splurged and got a second SSD for mirroring, hoping to speed up reads/model loads. Haven't tested this for efficacy, but it also gives redundancy. Shrugs!
Haven't paid a subscription in years or even signed up for $EMPLOYER offerings; handles the rare outsourcing well enough.
>> I will note, do get the 'Pro' models, the Mac Mini and the Macbook Air do not have internal fans
I have a base model M4 Mac Mini and it absolutely does have a fan inside it.
Or you can get a strix halo from AMD. They run about $2k from various Chinese brands, or a bit more from Framework. 128GBs of unified RAM are plenty for most models, although memory bandwidth is slower than in a mac.
I've noticed that running models locally is not necessarily easy. I'm currently trying to use Stable Diffusion with Flux2 klein 4b fp4 (because I have a normal GPU and not a specialised setup), and I can't get it to produce anything other than uneven blue.
I haven't tried pure text models, but 27B sounds painful for my system.
I really hope at some point in the near future AI models shrink enough or laptops get strong enough to run AI models locally. I haven't tried in the past year, but when I did it was very slow token output + laptop was on fire to make that happen.
I've wanted to try some of the more recent 8B models for local tab completion or agentic, any experience with those kinds of smaller models?
I've been running local language models on an existing laptop with 8GB GPU, currently using ministral-3:8b. It's faster than other models of similar size I used previously, fast enough that I never wait for it, rather have to scroll back to read the full output.
So far I'm using it conversationally, and scripting with tools. I wrote a simple chat interface / REPL in the terminal. But it's not integrated with code editor, nor agentic/claw-like loops. Last time I tried an open-source Codex-like thing, a popular one but I forget its name, it was slow and not that useful for my coding style.
It took some practice but I've been able to get good use out of it, for learning languages (human and programming), translation, producing code examples and snippets, and sometimes bouncing ideas like a rubber-duck method.
qwen3-8b is good and if you are doing tab completion then it's more than adequate. you can get basic agentic with it, but if you really want to use a serious agent and do some serious work, then at the very least qwen3.5-27B if you have a 5090 32gb vram GPU or qwen3.5-35-a3b if you have less than 24gb. if you want to use a laptop, get a laptop with a built in gpu or igpu.
> NTransformer High-efficiency C++/CUDA LLM inference engine. Runs Llama 70B on a single RTX 3090 (24GB VRAM) by streaming model layers through GPU memory via PCIe, with optional NVMe direct I/O that bypasses the CPU entirely.
untested:
I had some luck with Ollama + Mistral Nemo models on consumer hardware, it seemed to punch above its "weight class". But it’s still far enough behind ChatGPT et al. that I couldn’t stop using that for real work.
I have a lenovo workstation with 256GB ram but a weak sauce 12GB VRAM GPU. Is there any DMA trick to improve offload performance?
Things such as AirLLM, or good old llama.cpp.
use llama.cpp, you will be surprised how fast a model like qwen3.5-35b-a3b will run. that a3b means only 3B active parameter, so while infering the entire 3B will be in your GPU and you will get amazing performance. for your system, you should use the -cmoe option
Isn't between Q4-Q6 the usual recommendation for quants? Can you explain the Q8 recommendation, as I was under the impression that if you can run a model at Q8, you should probably run a bigger model in Q4 instead
There are no hard rules regarding quants, except less is better.
However models respond very differently, and there are tricks you can do like limiting quantization of certain layers. Some models can genrally behave fine down into sub-Q4 territory, while others don't do well below Q8 at all. And then you have the way it was quantized on top of that.
So either find some actual benchmarks, which can be rare, or you just have to try.
As an example, Unsloth recently released some benchmarks[1] which showed Qwen3.5 35B tolerating quantization very well, except for a few layers which was very sensitive.
edit: Unsloth has a page detailing their updated quantization method here[2], which was just submitted[3].
[1]: https://unsloth.ai/docs/models/qwen3.5/gguf-benchmarks
[2]: https://unsloth.ai/docs/basics/unsloth-dynamic-2.0-ggufs
if you can run Q8, go for it, always go for the best. matters a lot with vision models, never quantizie your kv cache, those always at f16.
you can always try evals and see if you have a q6 or q4 that can perform better than your q8. for smaller models i go q8. for bigger ones when i run out of memory I then go q6/q6/q4 and sometimes q3. i run deepseek/kimi-q4 for example.
I suggest for beginners to start with q8 so they can get the best quality and not be disappointed. it's simple to use q8 if you have the memory, choice fatigue and confusion comes in once you start trying to pick other quants...
The big AI labs are almost certainly selling inference below cost and burning mountains of money. With the insane increase in hardware prices, running models locally just doesn’t make any financial sense.
Nobody is saying it makes "financial sense", it's about control.
I have always taken plenty of care to try and avoid becoming dependent on big tech for my lifestyle. Succeeded in some areas failed in others.
But now AI is a part of so many things I do and I'm concerned about it. I'm dependent on Android but I know with a bit of focus I have a clear route to escape it. Ditto with GMail. But I don't actually know what I'd do tomorrow if Gemini stopped serving my needs.
I think for those of us that _can_ afford the hardware it is probably a good investment to start learning and exploring.
One particular thing I'm concerned about is that right now I use AI exclusively through the clients Google picked for me, coz it makes financial sense. (You don't seem to get free bubble money if you buy tokens via API billing, only consumer accounts). This makes me a bit of a sheep and it feels bad. There's so much innovation happening and basically I only benefit from it in the ways Google chooses.
(Admittedly I don't need local models to fix that particular issue, maybe I should just start paying the actual cost for tokens).
Just use an open weight model like GLM-5 behind an aggregator (OpenRouter, NanoGPT) then. That is a commodity market, right now.
It’s a luxury for the wealthy to be honest. At least for now. These prices are ridiculous
Apparently inference itself is profitable, at least according to an interview I watched with Dario. They even cover the cost of training itself, if you look at it on a model-by-model basis.
The cash burn comes from models ballooning in size - they spend (as an example, not actual numbers) 100M on training + inference for the lifetime of Sonnet 3.5, make 200M from subscriptions/api keys while it's SOTA, but then have to somehow come up with 1B to train Opus 4.0.
To run some other back of the envelope calcs: GLM 4.7 Air (previous "good" local LLM) can generate ~70 tok/s on a Mac Mini. This equates to 2,200 million tokens per year.
Openrouter charge $0.40 per million tokens, so theoretically if you were using that Mac mini at 100% utilisation you'd be generating $880 per annum "worth" of API usage.
Assuming a power draw of something 50W, you're only looking at 440kWh per annum. At 20c per kWh that's $90 on power, plus $499 to get the hardware itself. Depreciate that $499 hardware cost over 3 years and you're looking at ~$260 to generate ~$880 in inference income.
We are not in this thread because of finances but because of safety from oppressive governments and bad big corps. It's for you to decide the price of your own safety.
RAM and storage price increases due to the AI bubble have certainly made the cost of entry more expensive, but once you have the hardware, running models locally does make financial sense, especially if you have access to home solar power that is sufficient to run the hardware. You can't get much lower running cost than free.
I just can't help but imagine ChatGPT's sycophancy mixed with military operations. "Sharp insight bombing that wedding! Next would you like tips on mosques to bomb, or I can suggest some new napalm recipes that are extra spicey. Your call!"
Department of Defense: You just bombed the wrong Georgia! The people of Atlanta are furious!
ChatGPT: You're absolutely right, and you're right to call that out. Upon examination it does appear that there might have been a mistake with the coordinates of the bomb. Let's try again, this time we will double check before we launch any missiles! :missile emoji:
You forgot "I will take full responsibility"
:checkmark: :checkmark:
Not enough emdashes!
If Antrophic would have given in, I would have imagined the dialogs something like in claude CLI:
To complete the mission the war terminal needs to hit a target at XY:
1. yes
2. yes (and don't ask again for strike targets in this session)
3. no
Human in the loop is the term here I think.
(I am really glad they did not give in, but I do assume this is what it will come to anyway)
The point is it will be autonomous, the prompt could just be 'keep me safe' which will be interpreted who knows how and presumably no further prompting.
Autonomous just means this narrative is what you’d see if you looked at the logs of the drone talking to itself in it’s head…?
This is giving me strong Dark Star vibes with the intelligent bomb forcing a philosophical discussion about existence and perception at the end.
(Spoilers for the ending of the movie: https://youtu.be/h73PsFKtIck?si=tTm9TidmEMBHsXq1 )
Assuming it's not smart enough to write logs that make it less likely to be prosecuted/ disabled by coming up with fake reasons.
It can just say you were a terrorist because you were an adult male traveling with something in your hands. Humans already do this to justify strikes, likely the AI would do the same.
> Assuming it's not smart enough to write logs that make it less likely to be prosecuted
Alternatively: Assuming it's smart enough not to consider logging to /dev/null a reasonable way to speed up execution times.
Don't forget to add no melting ghost babies to that prompt!
I think I can guess what training data it used for the wedding droning idea!
reminds me of the lazy gun in against a dark background!
The real story isn't about cancelling one subscription. It's that we're watching vendor lock-in dissolve in real time.
18 months ago switching from ChatGPT meant meaningfully worse outputs. Today I routinely bounce between Claude, Gemini, local Qwen and Deepseek models depending on the task - coding in one, writing in another, privacy-sensitive stuff locally. The switching cost is approaching zero because the interface is converging on "text box + API".
This is genuinely unusual in tech. Usually the longer you use a platform, the harder it is to leave (social graphs, file formats, ecosystem). With LLMs the opposite is happening - the longer the market matures, the easier switching gets, because open weights keep getting better and every provider's API looks basically the same.
OpenAI's moat was never the model. It was habit and brand recognition. Events like this erode brand faster than any technical competitor could.
> No lock-in
Shouldn't Google have gone out of business?
I would agree it's one piece of the puzzle.
What local options are on par with ChatGPT?
> This is genuinely
Well, I have a good guess which of those models is your favorite.
I'm not even saying that Claude wrote this - because it still reads as human written, and it's not badly written - but it has just enough Claude voice in it that it feels like the thing where humans inevitably start talking like the people (or simulacrums thereof) that they interact with most. (Heck, you did "It's not X it's Y" twice)
...Or maybe I'm the crazy one here. I don't know. But if I'm right, it's fascinating to see this happen.
If you're crazy then I am too. 50% odds it was written by a human, 50% bot.
Story time!
I actually cancelled my ChatGPT subscription in late 2024 and documented the process, kind of as a social media thing because it had gotten so bad and I realized nobody in my family was using it anymore. I asked my wife if she was getting any use out of it and she told me she had been using Gemini and Grok for months because "GPT is very lazy now".
After a while another charge came in for the subscription, but I had the receipts: we had cancelled before the next billing cycle. I decided to try and reach out to OpenAI to resolve this, but they only let you chat with GPT itself for this, which it failed at and told me they weren't in the wrong and none of the information matched what actually happened.
I took this and used it to submit a chargeback request with Privacy.com, which I use for all of my online purchases. Normally I don't have to worry about this because I set a limit or cancel the cards I issue manually, but I had an OpenAI API account using the same card and I had been a bit lazy in using the same card for technically two different services.
Well, Privacy.com won that dispute and I got that money back. It's worth mentioning this is actually different than most banks will do now days. For the most part when you try to get a bank to do a chargeback they just roll it into their insurance and refund you the customer as a cost of doing business, but the actual scammer or shady merchant got to keep their stolen money, whereas I can be certain OpenAI didn't keep my money.
Your last statement is false. A shady merchant never gets to keep the stolen money. The card issuer/bank refunds you immediately because of consumer protection laws. But that charge is immediately charged to the processor. The processor then gets the merchant involved in a dispute process. If the merchant loses the processor charges the merchant. One way they do it is to immediately deduct it from their current processed transactions. If the merchant is no longer processing, they will usually go try to claw it back from their bank account if they have no held reserves, and if they can't get it, they send the merchant to collection. At the end the merchant must eat the cost or the processor. So in your case, the bank didn't eat the cost. OpenAI certainly ate the cost and the chargeback fees.
You are incorrect.
Chase uses a "provisional credit" system, but for small amounts, this credit often becomes permanent almost instantly.
Wells Fargo utilizes an automated system called the Wells Fargo Dispute Manager which is also similar.
Technically, it is Self-Insurance. Banks set aside a portion of their interchange revenue (the fees they charge merchants for every swipe) into a "Provision for Credit Losses." They use this pool of money to "buy" customer satisfaction for small errors rather than paying an employee $30/hour to investigate a $12 dispute.
And yet I’ve dealt with $15 (and I believe less) chargebacks on more than on occasion. Chargebacks that Stripe charges me $15 even if I win the dispute.
The banks don’t seem to care one bit about and evidence you do provide anyway, I just imagine their dispute system is just “sleep(10 days); return DENIED;”
> Your last statement is false. A shady merchant never gets to keep the stolen money.
Or any merchant for that matter. Chargebacks (from bad actors) are one of the most annoying things when you sell online when you’re a honest legit business. Stripe even charges you a penalty fee on top of that.
This makes me feel good. My gym was one of those places that lured you in with a low monthly price then heavily upsell you on personal trainers. The trainers were fine, but they were fairly inexperienced (usually college kids who took a course and then wanted a summer job or something). And once they found something better they'd leave. Nothing against the trainers, but I prefer to have consistency with my coaches.
Anyway, when I canceled my membership, I realized a few months later they were still charging me for training sessions. I chatted with the manager and apparently I had to cancel those separately. They refused to refund me for the sessions I never took. But they had a kind offer of being able to get training without paying for membership.
Well, I wasn't buying it, so I went on Chase and initiated chargebacks for every session charged after I canceled.
I dunno what happened on their end, but I got my money back. The business is still around, so I guess I didn't hurt them that much, but it's good to know that I probably was at least a hindrance.
Your credibility is shot when you claim that banks will just give you money. They absolutely do not. In fact, Discover has admitted to me in writing, that they always rule in favor of the Merchant if that Merchant responds to the dispute -- regardless of what their response says.
I've dealt with multiple chargebacks over the years and have only ever lost once -- when the Manager at Lowes' showed a check they wrote me [after I opened the dispute].
They absolutely do not just do anything and "write it off". Please be human and don't just rattle of high-confidence, baseless claims, especially as a giant billboard to Privacy.com
> Discover has admitted to me in writing, that they always rule in favor of the Merchant if that Merchant responds to the dispute -- regardless of what their response says
What, always? Like, literally 100% of the time if the merchant responds at all, they automatically win?
That's very hard to believe. I don't know Discover but I do know Visa and that's not how their system works at all.
I use Amex as much as possible because it’s basically never a fight. If I dispute, I get my money back. Granted, I don’t abuse the power so maybe I’ve earned some trust over the decades.
Wells Fargo, Chase, Capitol One, many others practice this provisional credit system, which functions very similar to an insurance.
Go read your banks terms and you'll find the provision. Do you want me to read your banks terms for you and point them out?
> Well, Privacy.com won that dispute and I got that money back.
Well, it seems like ChatGPT’s automated litigation resolution with Privacy.com got lazy. I wonder how a company with an AI can lose in a dispute instead of smokescreening the opponent with legitimate arguments and legalese.
It helps when you have a video posted on social media the day you cancelled and a video of talking to a clueless AI customer retention system that seems to not agree or understand how time works.
Also, chargeback dispute is limited to 3 rounds of back and fourth by Visa and MasterCard both. They don't get to endlessly come back etc.
I've just cancelled my subscription in solidarity with the OpenAI employees who signed the We Will Not Be Divided letter. I was a daily user of paid features like Deep Research. But not only was Anthropic's decision more ethical, their products are better, so I can't possibly justify the expense. Honestly I mostly was subscribed to take pressure off of my Claude usage limits, but I've just upped my Claude subscription to the next tier instead.
ETA: I've started an export of all my data. After that's done, I'm going to delete it all from my account (Settings > Data controls) and walk away from the account. I will give this to OpenAI, they make the process of disentangling yourself straightforward and there's integrity in that.
Curious—does it export memory and stuff? And how do you import it into Claude? Do you tell Claude "here is a data dump?"
I'm not going to import it into Claude, I'm not sure what I'll do with it other than pulling out some Deep Research reports I haven't gotten around to yet but was planning to read in the immediate future. I do think that would almost work - Claude presumably can't create "old" chats but I think pointing an agent at Google Takeout-style dumps makes these more viable as leverage to actually move away from these services. I think asking the agent to turn it into an Obsidian vault is probably the best bet?
I have Memory turned off so I'm afraid I won't be able to tell. I would guess so. The export hasn't completed yet either.
I had been considering ditching everyday ChatGPT use in favor of Claude anyway, but hadn’t gotten around to it mostly out of habit. Now I have a good reason to do it.
Same, I had put Claude in my metaphorical shopping cart about two weeks ago but I already had some inertia with ChatGPT + Codex and figured it wouldn't be better enough to justify changing.
That has changed, so I canceled my ChatGPT membership and signed up for Claude. I still have five bucks of credit I bought a year ago for the OpenAI API that I do not believe I can have refunded back, so some of my apps are going to have to stick to OpenAI until those credits run out since I'm not going to just donate five bucks to them.
Playing with it now, I honestly can't tell too much of a difference, which as far as I am concerned is a good thing.
You should also consider ollama and local models.
With this amount of competition it's almost weird to be paying anyone anything when one can just switch between free tiers of GPT, Claude, Gemini, Kimi, Qwen, Deepseek, Le Chat and an endless firehose of local models. The more your usage is randomly spread out, the less each provider can presumably profile you too as nobody has the full picture.
Consider carefully the usage limits of both services before deleting your account (as you cannot create a new one later with the same email). Claude's €20/month sub offers very little and this has unfortunately kept me from switching when I tried earlier this month.
I had been using both, ChatGPT mostly for chats and Claude mostly for code. Now I cancelled the ChatGPT subscription and turned on extra usage in Claude instead.
Consider that "little" is very subjective here, I find it to offer more than enough.
I get a fair amount of use out of it. I'm not using it for professional software development, just hobby stuff that I don't to write the boring parts of. For 20 bucks a month that seems pretty reasonable.
Before you fully delete your account, don't forget to first save your chats! Go to https://chatgpt.com/#settings/DataControls and click Export under "Export Data".
What value does this give you? Part of why I deleted my account was I couldn't think of a single thing of value in my chats from the past couple years? Maybe some nostalgia looking at what bugs I was fixing?
You’re confusing your situation with others. There are unlimited reasons someone else might want their chats.
Yeah, just curious what those reasons are? Like a valuable thought process you want to keep? Or like a data dump that is useful for looking at later?
Answers to non-trivial questions. Records of wide ranging topics I explored.
You seriously can’t imagine a single reason why someone would want to save their chats? That’s hard to believe.
For me this is very valuable. The results of personal "research projects" are in there. I use it for reference. Of course I could ask Claude to get me those answers but why waste the energy?
Thank you, was just kind of curious. I've never really seen how other people use AI chats so was curious what the use cases were.
Same I furiously clear memories. This is a tool, not my friend or assistant.
Upvoted because you were genuinely asking a question and don't deserve to be down voted for that.
Thanks, but I guess I understand the sentiment. I probably should have not said that I couldn't think of "a single thing of value" when that is a bit of a judgement along with my question. Anyways, it is interesting hearing what people ask it, I think I've only ever used it like a search engine / bug fixing while it seems some people have much deeper conversations or discussions that are worth remembering.
I'm glad I upvoted. Your perspective and questions are valid, no matter the depth of conversation. You'd be surprised what fresh questions can do for a topic.
I for one might use these chats as an input for switching over to keep the learning process fast. For me it took a while for ChatGPT to get me. I know that other people delete memories because they want a clean slate experience with every chat. I use chatGPT mostly private (use claud code for work for instance) and I prefer that memories travel across chats.
Some people have apparently been using it as a notepad. See the following: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-04064-7
In my case, I would rather keep it than lose it. It's just text so small amount of data. You can trivially get a GPT Embedding for it and search it in DuckDB later for things you asked.
Thanks. I've been meaning to do this for a couple days and this made it easy enough to do in the moment.
You can also just dump the localdb
Just deleted my account. Can always sign up for a new account later if you need (with a different email).
Even with the same email, probably.
They specifically say you cannot reuse the same email. I also tried after deleting and it said this email has been deleted.
I guess that means they are only soft deleting.
The delete screen says they delete your data except where necessary by law for them to keep. Would love to know what percentage actually is deleted.
Didn't a judge order they need to keep all chats because of the NYT case? Has the situation changed?
Ah, interesting. It’s not clear why they would do that, unless they are using the email address as the sole account ID.
They clearly are, and Anthropic too. That's why you can't change the email address on an account.
This doesn’t seem to be correct. From the help page:
“If I delete my account can I create a new account with the same email?
Yes. You can create a new account using the same email address after 30 days, provided the prior account was fully deleted (not deactivated).”
Has anyone tried with a long-deleted account email?
I re-registered an account last year to the same email that was used previously. That account was deleted in 2023. Although they used to request your phone number back in the day and do not do so anymore, so email retention policies may also have changed.
Huh? That seems weird?
So if I no longer want their services for any period of time, they no longer want me as a customer for any reason?
What other business work like that?
Uber
Just cancelled. I’ll give my money to a company with leaders that have a modicum of backbone.
A few days ago I went to cancel mine and it just said they'd give me a free month instead so I said OK. I thought it was funny all the patterns to keep you on
I'd cancelled my subscription earlier this month organically as I wasn't getting any net positive value.
BTW, what's going to hurt their business more, deleting my account or using the free tier?
I've found the free tier to be extremely limited recently, but in a stochastic way. Some days I ask one friggin question and it tells me I only have two questions left and should upgrade. I just switch to a different model.
I love that the tool in question is very calm and collected, in contrast with the emotional wreck that is the US regime. I got a very helpful response to this prompt and I will make it continue working on a python script to get my historical chats looking good in Obsidian.
> Ok. So I'm cancelling the subscription to ChatGPT and moving over to Claude because of the news of OpenAI striking a deal with us department of war. (https://www.techradar.com/pro/openai-just-signed-a-huge-deal...) Please line out a good exit strategy where I can keep the information in my chats and projects on my own hard drive.
I'm gonna have to see if I can get my company to switch off openAI. Hopefully we can make a small dent and if enough of us do it, a larger dent.
Sounds like it won't really be a pain for me though based off comments on HN indicating Claude is the better product and I doubt I personally would hit any sort of token limits with the amount I use agentic coding.
PSA: If you can't switch your coding agent right away, you can just reroute Codex to a different model for the time being.
https://github.com/openai/codex/issues/26#issuecomment-28116...
I'n sorry, Dave ...
I just cancelled my ChatGPT subscription that I had since 2023. OpenAI offered me an extra month free, to keep my subscription.
I thought it was only me. I just unsubscribed it this morning.
How long does data export usually take for three years of medium usage? I started it eight hours ago, got a confirmation email that export had started but so far no email with a download link.
After the "upside down cup" debacle, and the "walk vs drive to the carwash" conundrum, and so many other examples where GPT 5.2 thinking failed miserably and Opus 4.6 and (even Sonnet 4.6 extended thinking) nailed it, I think they earned people wanting to cancel their subscription regardless of yesterday's events.
OpenAI has ~50M paying subscribers driving >$10B in revenue.
You would probably need at least ~1M subscribers to cancel to make this painful.
Probably needs more attention outside of tech circles for that to happen but I suspect this will get drowned out in the face of other stuff.
Deleted.
Anthropic usage credits purchased.
Message those that work forces.
Frankly this is a very easy choice. Unless you need to make images, Claude wins over chatgpt on every realm. For writing and coding there is no match. It's one of those times where you can do the right thing and get the better product.
I was one of the early paying adopter of chatgpt but when Claude came around I switched and never looked back. I've been on the max plan for a while.
Just asking for information: Why do we want to cancel our ChatGPT subscription? Didn't OpenAI demand exactly the same safety terms from the DoD as Anthropic did?
> "Two of our most important safety principles are prohibitions on domestic mass surveillance and human responsibility for the use of force, including for autonomous weapon systems," Altman said.
https://www.axios.com/2026/02/27/pentagon-openai-safety-red-...
Even taking him at his word (you shouldn't), this is still OpenAI swooping in and signing a deal after its competitor was banned from government use. Instead of joining hands with Anthropic they decided to take advantage of the situation.
Because it is incredibly disgusting/bad form to swoop in like this.
1. Log into ChatGPT
2. Click on your profile icon and select New Chat icon.
3. Formulate a polite prompt in the regard of subscription cancellation.
4. Wait for a reply from Mr. Altman.
A week is a long time in politics. It's an eternity in AI. Anyone want to take a stab at what next week looks like?
I just keep getting 'Something went wrong while canceling your subscription.' :(
They use the web user-input as training data, we should use agents to inject it with noisy garbage.
Thanks, I had Claude Code do it for me.
Don’t forget to change your model in Github copilot and such
Last time i pressed the button to delete all my chats it behaved odd afterwards, then all chats where there again. Just saying.
I canceled all services and deleted my account with OpenAI right after the announcement. They can get money from the current US regime but I will not contribute to their violations of the constitution.
Should rename itself to NoSpineAI
bash> mv OpenAI NoSpineAI
mv: 'OpenAI': No such file or directory
bash> ls
ClosedAI
It's frustrating. Sam Altman already has everything. He's a billionaire, he can buy literally anything he wants, he can live anywhere he wants, he can buy a brand new sports car every day just to blow it up, he can buy a new house every week just to demolish and replace it with a trampoline park. He can afford to do anything.
He can fucking afford to have some fucking principles. He's not going to end up on the street for not being a fucking coward.
Because of some bullshit minor PTSD from a few years ago, I sort of swore an oath to myself that I wouldn't let being a coward stop me from doing the right thing, regardless of the consequences, and by doing things that I think are right it has cost me opportunities and money. I'm not homeless, but it made the job hunt harder when I was unemployed. I can actually feel consequences from standing up for what I believe in. Sam Altman being a coward is not equivalent, he's choosing to do the wrong thing for no reason.
> He can fucking afford to have some fucking principles.
Who is to say he doesnt? Just because they dont align with yours doesnt mean he doesnt have his own principles.
> he's choosing to do the wrong thing
To many millions he is doing the right thing. I am on the fence personally, but I know many people who think that increasing defense capabilities at any cost is something that the governmetn should be doing. Any company that helps them do that is 'doing the right thing'.
> I wouldn't let being a coward stop me from doing the right thing
The 'right thing' is always subjective, and for you it is decided by you alone. Try to remember that and see things from both sides.
He posted like seven hours ago about these principles and changed them like twenty minutes after the president had a temper tantrum about Anthropic.
Whether or not he agrees with my principles isn’t the issue. He doesn’t even agree with his own stated principles. He posted his stipulations about AI models used by the department of defense to presumably get social credit, and then changed his mind over the course of a few hours.
He claims that the Department of Defense principles just happen to now align with these principles but as far as I can tell he seems to just be trusting their word. The word of a Fox News TV host and a convicted fraudster.
You can judge his actions all you like, but unless you know the man and sit down and discuss it with him everything you are saying is just speculation and opinion. That is fine, just realise that.
Actions are the only thing that matter.
"He does evil things, but maybe he feels conflicted about it. That makes them okay."
Umm, no shit? This isn’t actually saying anything. I am saying that his stated principles are inconsistent with his actions.
Yes, sure, maybe deep down on his heart of hearts he actually is the most kind caring person who ever existed, but I have no way of knowing what is in his heart of hearts so I can only judge him by what he has said and done, and I am arguing that his actions don’t match his words.
You really think that a CEOs public statements match their real thoughts and feelings?
Everything you hear from any CEO is constructed to form a desired image and narrative. Any public statements from a CEO that you are using to judge their character is completely false and misguided. You have no idea what the real man is behind the image.
Are you trying to say he might be a great guy if you get past the things he says and the actions he takes? What's left?
You haven’t really gone through my comment history here, which is fine, I haven’t gone through yours, but if you had you would see that today I posted about how you can’t trust anything billionaires say because there’s no negative consequences for lying.
I am arguing that he posted on Twitter not even 24 hours ago a post laying out what looked like principles. Not even 24 hours later he decided that those principles aren’t actually important.
I am not a psychic because psychics don’t actually exist, so I can’t read minds, so I cannot know what he is actually thinking. I am claiming that he’s a piece of shit for not following his own stated principles. I actually do think billionaires should face consequences for lying.
There has to be a line that will not be crossed, in order to be seen to have principles.
Until that line has been reached, we can safely assume there are no principles at play.
You are the one drawing that line for yourself. Everybodies line of principles is in a different place.
No, you're incorrect.
Some people never reach a line. And if they do get close, it gets hastily redrawn.
"increasing defense capabilities at any cost "
Ugh
Agreed, but in this society of fear created after 9/11 it is a very popular sentiment across many millions of people.
"Only when the tide goes out do you discover who's been swimming naked." -- Warren Buffet
The original context was very different, about financial markets, but I've been thinking about it a lot the past 12 months. There's a lot of cowards in high places in tech, surprisingly cowardly people. Or they have sold out their principles to be friends with terrible people, which is also a form of cowardice. Hard to say which.
The whole Epstein thing is a really really great marker of this too. Though I'm not sure if the tide has gone out all the way (we mostly know what's going on), or if there's a lot more tide to fall.
LBJ was a real son of a bitch, who, when he finally was thrust into power as president, did something pretty surprising by going all-in on the civil rights movement. Power reveals who people are, and times of trials reveal who people really are.
I think we merely have a system where the best people are selfless and poor and the worse people are rich and in charge. It makes sense; we have a system that rewards immoral behavior so we shouldn't be surprised that immoral people have made it to the top.
Such systems are nothing new, and are in fact the norm. The current system is perhaps even notable for how it has deviated from the past, and in particular Silicon Valley was a means for promoting some of the most selfless and poor into positions of great wealth and influence, especially going back to the Fairchild Semiconductor days. Always been greedy venal and immoral people here, but perhaps less than in other systems of power.
The stoics, people that Zuckerberg and others pretend to understand and follow, would have nothing but disdain for the lack of virtue that's apparent in those like Zuckerberg.
I think if you read Plato's The Republic you might find that this is nothing new. Welcome to society and human nature.
History is full of cowards who are arguably as guilty as the people who committed the atrocities. The people who are remembered positively in history are the people who overcame their fears and did what they thought was right, even if it carried a real risk of it blowing up in their faces.
> It's frustrating. Sam Altman already has everything. He's a billionaire, he can buy literally anything he wants, he can live anywhere he wants, he can buy a brand new sports car every day just to blow it up, he can buy a new house every week just to demolish and replace it with a trampoline park. He can afford to do anything.
No, he doesn't have everything. See, maybe he's worth $3 billion. Or maybe $30 billion. But he's not worth $300 billion. That's a lot more worth he could have! And even then, he could be worth $3 trillion instead!
But yes, $100 million is the maximum amount of assets one individual should ever be allowed to hold. Potentially less. Anything higher is enormously harmful to society. People would get used to it very quickly and would work just as hard to reach that $100 million as they do now to reach $100 billion.
“Yes, but I have something he will never have — ENOUGH” - Joseph Heller.
After a billion dollars, I doubt another billion will make you happier. In fact, I don’t think another trillion will make you happier. In fact, I don’t think another quadrillion dollars will make you happier, etc.
After a certain point you have effectively infinite money. Enough money to live dozens of extremely comfortable lifetimes. And importantly enough money to afford to actually have some principles. Oh no, he wouldn’t be able to afford to have his house re-covered in 24 karat gold again if he doesn’t fellate our lolcow president.
'Dozens' should be multiples by many million, but I definitely agree with the sentiment.
Way more than a dozen!
We live in a capitalist economy. What do you expect, a company to just say 'Thats fine we have enough money we dont need any more'?
How does a $100 billion dollar company grow? By taking on massive government and military contracts, they are the only clients big enough left in the world.
If a company does not show continual growth then it is classed as failing. That is the society we have built, and you cannot blame one man for following those principles. Every CEO in existence does the same.
Somehow Anthropic’s CEO managed to reach a different conclusion.
They don’t have to do business with every single entity who asks them to and they don’t have to bend over for every stipulation that that entity asks for.
Yep, in exactly the same way that for years Google was 'not evil'.
When anthropic can no longer grow through developer subscriptions and deals with ethical companies, Lets see how long it takes their shareholders to force them to remove such sweet statements from their company mission statement.
I love how you chastised me for speculating on Altman’s mind state but apparently you can predict the future and know what Anthropic is going to do N years from now.
Yeah maybe Anthropic will become a rent-seeking corporation. That’s likely even. And yet that’s not actually relevant at all to what I said; the fact is that right now they appear to have more principles than Altman and OpenAI
> We live in a capitalist economy.
We live in a multifaceted (are we allowed to use that word again? I think 2026 models have stopped using it) economy.
> That is the society we have built
Maybe you have, I sure haven't. Luckily "we" also haven't, as many - no, the overwhelming majority of people - aren't like that.
> and you cannot blame one man for following those principles.
You absolutely can, as much as you can blame the sadistic guards at Auschwitz.
> Every CEO in existence does the same.
A shocking, bald-faced lie. How do you get these keystrokes out of your fingers? This is so trivially false it immediately outs itself as bad faith. It takes less time to fact-check as being made up than the average post on Truth Social.
Please, come on.
Is this really the best backup?
Sam Altman has demonstrated that he's a piece of ** with this move.
We can now safely assume that all the pronouncements and grand statements before were simply posturing.
> Is this really the best backup?
It is the justification for anything any corporation does. This is a company with boards of directors and shareholders, you really think this is just Sams opinion guiding this?
> Sam Altman has demonstrated that he's a piece of * with this move.
Thats is your opinion based only on what his company has publicly dislcosed to you. I prefer not to judge a mans character based on corporate puffery.
Sympathy for the Devil.
I am eagerly waiting for the afterlife.
Ok.
I completely support the sentiment of what you wrote. But it doesn't directly seem relevant to the parent question.
It’s not but it is relevant to the surrounding context as to why this post has made it to the top of HN right now.
Very few of the comments on this thread are actually about the act of canceling the subscription.
Sam (and Greg Brockman) want something they do not have, very desperately. They want to win, to be Great Men, to be remembered by history with Jobs and Gates and the other tech luminaries. This is mentioned in Karen Hao's Empire of AI.
They are both a lesson to me that no matter how much you have, you will not necessarily be satisfied.
Principled men do not become billionaires.
Damn my business plan just got renewed for another year I forgot to cancel.
589, 590, 591, 592, 593, 594, 595, 596, 597, 598, 599, 600, ... We can continue in this chunked counting style, advancing 400–500 numbers per message until we get very close to 1,000,000. Shall I continue the next chunk from 601?
count up to 1000
altman is now and always has been a real POS. anyone who wasn't paying attention before can see that clearly now.
this is going to be better than the time bezos killed the kamala endorsement to curry favor with the regime
Killing the Kamala endorsement wasn't a difficult call to be fair. Bezos just didn't want to endorse anyone. Easy to understand.
which is what you would say if you accept the narrative and ignore the history
welp
I cancelled my anthropic sub yesterday and the dark patterns are so frustrating.
You go to billing. Then don't click change my subscription. Your only option to change the subscription is to "upgrade" to an annual plan. Instead you have toScroll down past your card details etc to a red button that says cancel.
Who comes up with this crap?
At least OpenAI puts cancelling within the Manage Plan section.