达里奥 · 89

Anthropic will be the only company to take the lead, and Dario responds: AI will naturally be concentrated, and regulation is the antidote

Comparative news, according to surveillance, investor Gavin Baker said on the “All-In Podcast” that many people he trusted told him that Dario Amodei had said that one day Anthropic might become the only private company in the world. Anthropic researcher Sholto Douglas immediately denied it, saying that the statement was completely false and that Baker's sources were lying. Baker accepted the clarification but continued to ask. He said that the reason people believe this rumor is because it is very similar to Dario's long-standing public assertion: AI is dangerous, power can be highly concentrated, and therefore requires regulation. Baker's view is the opposite: the more dangerous AI is, the more capabilities should be distributed rather than handed over to a few companies and governments. Dario then responded personally without saying anything about the only company. He believes that AI will originally be concentrated on a few giants because of chips, computing power, and scale effects, and that opening up weights will only allow more people to get to the models, not solving the problem of who has the ability to train the strongest models. So instead, his answer is regulation, and the focus is on those with the strongest control: strict testing of cutting-edge models, less control for small companies and chasers; open weights can be retained, but capabilities also need to be tested when approaching the frontier. Baker is concerned about regulatory manufacturing concentration, while Dario believes regulation is being used to hedge against concentration. He also responded to Baker's criticism that he always talks about the risks of AI. Dario said that the public doesn't trust AI companies is not because they talk too much about risk, but because the industry promises too much and actually does too little. There is no use promoting AI every day that it can cure cancer; it is only useful if it actually cures cancer. Anthropic is ramping up biology and medicine, and hopes to see some early results in the coming months.

6d ago

Anthropic sprints to trillion-dollar IPO: This brother and sister overtook their old owner OpenAI in 5 years

In May 2026, a confidential IPO document was submitted to the US Securities and Exchange. In the same month, Anthropic completed the H round of financing of 65 billion US dollars, and the post-investment valuation reached 965 billion US dollars, surpassing OpenAI for the first time. In the secondary market, the company's implied valuation has climbed further to $1.2 trillion. And the starting point of this Big Mac was a pair of siblings: Dario Amodei (Dario Amodei) and Daniela Amodei (Daniela Amodei). A cobbler and a librarian raised two top AI brothers and sisters who both grew up in a working family in San Francisco's Mission District. Her father, Riccardo Amodei (Riccardo Amodei), was a leather craftsman from Tuscany, Italy; her mother, Elena Engel (Elena Engel), worked as a project manager at the San Francisco Public Library. Her father died of illness when the brother and sister were just adults. This family, which has nothing to do with technology, has emerged as two top figures in the AI field. The older brother Dario was born in 1983 and has been a standard science genius since childhood. He studied at Caltech and Stanford University with a bachelor's degree in physics, and then a doctorate degree in biophysics from Princeton University. His research interests are the electrophysiology of neural circuits. After graduating from his PhD, he completed his postdoctoral research at Stanford University School of Medicine, focusing on applying machine learning to biomedical data. My younger sister, Daniela, is four years younger than her brother, but she is following a very different path. She attended the University of California at Santa Cruz on a classical flute scholarship and graduated with the highest honors (summa cum laude) in 2009 — majoring in English literature with a minor in political science. A few years after graduation, Daniela managed humanitarian grants for international relief organizations, and went to Washington to manage schedules and voter affairs for members of the U.S. House of Representatives. In 2013, she made a decision that surprised everyone — to switch to tech and join Stripe, a 45-person fintech company at the time. As a founding recruiter, she personally expanded the company from 45 to over 300, then switched to risk management. In 2016, Dario joined the recently established OpenAI and quickly became vice president of research, leading the development of GPT-2 and GPT-3. In 2018, Daniela was also recruited into OpenAI — her brother has been a core researcher there for two years. My brother is in charge of technology, and my younger sister has gone from engineering manager to vice president of safety and policy. “The direction is wrong; the more you do, the farther you get from your goal,” but a rift quietly appeared in 2020. With Microsoft's investment, OpenAI began to accelerate commercialization. Dario is increasingly concerned that AI security is being overlooked. According to the Wall Street Journal investigation report, the conflict between the brother and sister and OpenAI co-founder Brockman has been going on for a long time. Dario, who was in charge of research at the time, directly banned him from participating in the development of the GPT series predecessor project due to Brockman's “excessive intervention in the project and alienating researchers.” In 2020, the conflict completely broke out. Ultraman called the brother and sister into the conference room, accusing them of inciting executives to “make small reports” to the board of directors. Daniela, who has a strong personality, called a so-called “informant” to confront him on the spot. As a result, the other party had no idea about the alleged plot. This complete collapse of trust eventually became the trigger for the brother and sister to leave OpenAI. On Lex Fridman's podcast about his reasons for leaving OpenAI, Dario said, “Trying to argue with someone else's vision is extremely inefficient. Why don't you bring someone you trust and make your own vision.” At the end of 2020, Dario left his job with his sister and five other core members of OpenAI. In January 2021, seven people co-founded Anthropic. The company name comes from the Greek word “anthropos” (human), and was registered as a “Public Benefit Corporation” (Public Benefit Corporation) from the beginning, promising to find a balance between commercial profit and social responsibility. The division of labor between brother and sister is extremely clear: Dario is CEO, focusing on computing power clusters, machine learning architectures, and technical security; Daniela is president, responsible for corporate expansion, financing, policy, and organizational culture. One detail is — Dario only has one immediate subordinate, his Chief of Staff. All other company executives reported to Daniela. As Dario said, it freed him almost completely from everyday chores and was able to focus on technology and strategy. The reason why this division of labor works so smoothly is largely due to the tacit agreement the two have formed over decades...

37d agoWendy#Anthropic #IPOs #OpenAI #public

After DeepSeek's latest round of funding, Liang Wenfeng surpassed Anthropic's Dario and OpenAI Brockman in net worth

Comparative news. According to foreign media reports, after DeepSeek completed the latest round of financing, founder Liang Wenfeng's personal wealth more than doubled, making him the person with the highest net worth among the founders of the big AI model in the world. According to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, Liang Wenfeng currently has a net worth of $36 billion (previously around $16.7 billion), surpassing Anthropic co-founder Dario Amodei and OpenAI co-founder Greg Brockman. This comparison only covers companies whose main business and most of their revenue comes directly from the AI model. It does not include large technology groups with diversified businesses such as Alibaba and Tencent, as well as AI industry chain-related companies such as data centers and semiconductors. The vast majority of Liang Wenfeng's wealth comes from his holdings in DeepSeek. In June of this year, DeepSeek reported that 50 billion yuan of financing was completed. The company's valuation exceeded 330 billion yuan, and Liang Wenfeng personally invested 20 billion yuan. According to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, its shareholding ratio was diluted to about 78%.

39d ago#financing

Buy AI and stop following the trend! People who really make a lot of money only look at this “hidden invoice”

Author: Danny Original title: To those ordinary people with empty AI positions: You think you're late — in fact, you just don't have your own worldview Write to ordinary people with empty AI positions: You think you're late — in fact, you just don't have your own worldview” What to do? I haven't made any money from AI, so I won't be able to do it until I get in the car. “This is probably the voice in your heart when you opened this post. NVIDIA has increased tenfold in three years. The number of optical module leaders has increased 17 times a year. Open the news and every article talks about AI. Colleagues are showing off their holdings. The WeChat group is sharing “the next ten times the share”. You have an empty position. You're anxious. You open your account and hang your finger over the “buy” button. I'd like to ask you a question first - why would you want to buy it? If your answer is “AI is a big trend” and “some KOL is calling” — that's someone else's judgment, not yours; if your answer is “my friend earns money, I want to make money” — that's jealousy, not an investment; if your answer is “it's too late to buy” — that's FOMO, not analysis. Your real problem isn't 'late'. Your problem is that you don't have your own worldview. Sounds abstract. Let me be clear in a specific way — why this question is 100 times more important than “what stock to buy”. 1. Where do 99% of people lose? Open any financial platform. All discussions revolved around one question: what to buy. “Can NVIDIA continue to rise? ““Do you want to chase the optical module? ““What do you think of the robotics section? “The questions themselves are wrong. They assume one thing — you already know that AI/robotics/optical communications are in the right direction. And this is exactly the part that should be thought of independently the most, but skipped by 99% of people. What's the cost of skipping? When your judgment is right, you don't know why — so you don't know when to leave. You buy it on NVIDIA's $80 recommendation from a KOL. You can't bear to sell it to $140 because it's “long-term bullish”. If you go up to $200, you want to increase your position because “the momentum is strong”. It drops to $150 and you're confused, “the story is still there”. If it falls to $100, you sell in a panic, “did you read it wrong”. When your judgment is wrong, you don't know why — so you keep losing money. You bought an AI concept stock for $50. If it falls to $30, you don't sell, “AI has been the main line for ten years”. It drops to $20 and you increase your position, “it's cheaper now”. If you drop to $10, you confess defeat. After that, this stock never returned to your cost. What these two situations have in common: you never have your own frame of judgment. You're just listening to different people and doing different things at different times. That's the price of a rented worldview. 2. What is “one's own worldview” A worldview is not watching the news. A worldview answers a few essential questions: (For example) What will be the biggest change in human society in the next 5-10 years? Will the energy structure be restructured? Will computational costs drop by another order of magnitude? Will the labor market be restructured? Where are the physical constraints of these changes? Is there enough electricity? Are there enough minerals? Is there enough talent? How will the money flow? Who makes money from it? Who is being disrupted? Who is the real bottleneck? When you can answer these questions, stock selection becomes easy — because you already know where the money is going, you just need to find the floodgates in that river. More importantly — when the market fluctuates, you don't panic and don't ask people everywhere. Because your judgment doesn't depend on “whether it will rise or fall tomorrow”, but on “what the world will look like in 5 years”. Buffett, Munger, and Dario are able to overcome bulls and bears, not because they are smarter, but because their worldview was created by themselves, not fed by the market. 3. Two paths: self-building vs. following path A: It is difficult to establish your own worldview. It requires you to read a lot across disciplines, track first-hand sources of information, think independently for a long time, and accept that 30% of judgments will be wrong. The vast majority of ordinary people don't have this reserve of time, energy, knowledge...

45d ago谢伟伦#AI #AI topics #Anthropic #OpenAI #US stocks

Silicon Valley CEOs Don't Talk About AI Layoffs Anymore

Source: Wall Street Journal Author: Katherine Bindley Compiled and edited by: bitPushNews As public views on artificial intelligence turn negative, warnings about large-scale layoffs are dwindling. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman (Sam Altman) said the industry has underestimated our ability to stay “people-centered” in everything. A year ago, many business leaders conveyed the message that artificial intelligence would completely destroy jobs. But over the past month or so, tech CEOs have begun to adopt a more optimistic tone. In late May of this year, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman (Sam Altman) — who has long predicted that artificial intelligence will cause drastic changes in the labor market — said at a conference: “We were largely right in predicting technology, but completely wrong in terms of social and economic impacts.” Soon after, in an interview with CNBC, he said, “Our industry underestimates our ability to keep people at the center of everything.” Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei (Dario Amodei) warned in May 2025 that artificial intelligence could eliminate half of startup jobs. A year later, he highlighted the more positive solutions facing companies adopting artificial intelligence: “They can do the same thing with fewer resources, which can lead to results such as layoffs; or they can do more with the same resources. But it takes creativity.” In an article published by the executive in June, he wrote that his job loss warning was to give policymakers and the private sector the best chance to adapt — he wasn't trying to be a “doomsday prophet.” (He also wrote that the possibility of “permanent unemployment” still exists.) This more optimistic outlook is to win back customers and the public who are dissatisfied with the promise of artificial intelligence to “disrupt the world”? Or do people now have a better understanding of the role of artificial intelligence in the workplace? Some comments on AI's potential to create jobs come at a time when companies are raising more capital for AI spending through layoffs. Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg (Mark Zuckerberg) recently said in an interview with “Complex” that if companies focus on increasing employee productivity at a faster rate than automation, “theoretically, there should be more jobs in the future, not fewer.” In May of this year, the company began cutting 8,000 employees and streamlining the team. In February of this year, Amazon CEO Andy Jassy (Andy Jassy) talked about the job creation potential of artificial intelligence in an interview with CNBC. A year ago, he announced that due to artificial intelligence, the company would reduce the number of employees in the next few years. Amazon said that the 16,000 layoffs that followed had nothing to do with the application of artificial intelligence, but were aimed at continuing to reduce organizational hierarchies and revive the company culture. Overall, the narrative has moved from an apocalyptic scenario of “streamlining employees” caused by artificial intelligence to a future where workers can keep their jobs and become more productive. Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei once warned about job replacement issues caused by artificial intelligence, but in a recent article, he said he wasn't meant to be a “doomsday prophet.” This shift in sentiment isn't limited to tech leaders: an EY-Parthenon survey found that the proportion of CEOs who believe investment in artificial intelligence will lead to drastic layoffs fell from around 46% in January 2025 to 20% in May of this year. “They may have noticed that the labor market really isn't changing (or collapsing) as quickly as they expected,” said David Autor, an economics professor at MIT. “They may have realized that claiming that your great new product will destroy the economy is simply bad business strategy.” A recent study by fintech company Ramp and workforce intelligence firm Revelio Labs found that among companies that invest the most in artificial intelligence, employment growth rates are about 10% higher than similar companies that have not yet adopted artificial intelligence. “The companies I know that use artificial intelligence the most are also the ones that hire the most,” Ultraman said in an interview with CNBC. Some tech leaders say artificial intelligence is even creating demand for certain jobs, and more jobs that don't currently exist will appear in the future. Many well-known...

47d agoWendy#AI #OpenAI #Sam Altman #AI #employment

Power was centralized in the name of preventing Altman from getting bad. Former employees denounced Anthropic and were mired in the myth of good people

Comparative news, according to monitoring, Anthropic, which flaunts high trust and low self, is sliding towards homogenization of ideas. The “WIRED” (WIRED) report revealed differences within the company regarding governance evaluations. Some former employees revealed that there is a lively debate within the company; however, other former employees have outlined a more dull scene, saying that sharp criticism is largely isolated in private group chats, and that regular all-staff meetings are even jokingly called Dario Vision Quests (Dario Vision Quests) by employees. Listening to CEO Dario Amodei is like listening to a pastor sermon (sermon); few people challenge management's decisions in public meetings. The origin of the dull atmosphere lies in Anthropic's belief in elite safety that promotes attack and defense. Executives are working hard internally to view OpenAI CEO Sam Altman (and Meta and xAI) as a negative textbook, while instilling elite logic in employees: they must maintain industry leadership in business, computing power, and research talent to be qualified to have a say in rule-making. Former OpenAI director Helen Toner once made a forest analogy: villagers will pour into a magical forest full of monsters no matter what, and Anthropic's strategy is to get one step deeper into the forest, tame monsters while unleashing technological dividends, and controlling catastrophic risks. The quest for technological dominance has also made Anthropic's safety and ethical choices frequently contested. In the fall of 2024, despite internal opposition, management joined hands with Palantir to open services to US intelligence and defense agencies. Claude has now been proven to be used for target identification in the Middle East conflict. Faced with questions about attacks causing civilian casualties, Amodei said he was unaware, but argued that as long as humans make a final decision, the use of technology is compliant. In June of this year, the development team secretly built breaking code into the flagship model Claude Fable 5 to secretly interfere with illegal development. However, after facing strong industry protests, the company was forced to compromise and announced that the secret interference mechanism would be adjusted to publicly visible security restrictions. Industry criticism points out that betting entirely on cutting-edge AI security on the moral superiority of a few elites will inevitably lead to unavoidable blind spots in self-discipline.

57d ago

Deciphering SpaceX IPO: How Musk Installed AI Into Rockets

Source: Late LatePost Special Author 丨 Zhou Hengxing Author Information: Zhou Hengxing, founder of English tech media Pandaly, author of “The Legend of Ultman”, translator of “Iron Man in Silicon Valley” “If you have a decisive technical advantage, you can win with minimal casualties.” On a Saturday morning in July 2025, an AI entrepreneur from China walked into Palo Alto's xAI headquarters. It's in the heart of Silicon Valley, not far from Tesla's headquarters. Unlike the old warehouses and old industrial buildings favored by many San Francisco tech companies, this one is more like a typical Silicon Valley R&D park: low, restrained, with large glass facades supported by steel columns, and manicured shrubs and quiet parking lots outside the building. Extending outward along this area are Stanford University, Dune Road, AI labs, autonomous driving teams, and robotics companies. Compared to the neighborhoods in San Francisco that were repeatedly transformed by the last round of internet boom, this is the real hinterland of Silicon Valley: calm, orderly, and even a bit boring. People here still believe that technology is not an application on a screen, but rather a power that can directly transform cars, factories, energy, robots, and the physical world. In the US, Musk has long been more than just the “world-changing” entrepreneur. He is at the center of political controversy, the target of daily media pursuit and attack, and a person many Silicon Valley liberal elites are no longer willing to publicly embrace. But in China, he still has a rare kind of prestige. Musk has read “Sun Tzu's Art of War” many times and thinks it is full of wisdom. In a podcast, he also added that the book should probably add a section on “technology.” “If you have a decisive technical advantage, you can win with minimal casualties.” In the age of AI, the “technical advantage” Musk is looking for is more and more specific in terms of talent. He has publicly expressed his respect for Chinese technology companies and his appreciation for Chinese tech talents many times. Once, I retweeted a robot demonstration video from a Chinese company to him. He praised and replied, “I have great respect for our Chinese competitors. There are so many smart and hardworking people in China.” Amid the ebb and flow of entrepreneurship in the AI industry last year, Musk also quickly noticed the products of this group of young Chinese people. The conversation with the Chinese entrepreneur continued for two hours that day. What surprised him was that Musk in front of him was not the same person in the media — Musk was very relaxed and friendly throughout the process. Musk talks about models, computing power, X data, and the future of human civilization. One day after the conversation ended, the entrepreneur received an offer to buy from Musk. But the entrepreneur didn't catch the olive branch he threw on the spot. A few months later, he turned around and joined another Silicon Valley company. At the time, it seemed like just an unsuccessful recruitment. Eight months later, it looked like a footnote that appeared early. On March 13, 2026, Musk made a rare post on X. He said that xAI was not properly built for the first time and is being rebuilt from the foundation. Immediately after that, he apologized to those talents who had been wrongly rejected by xAI over the past few years and didn't even get an interview. To someone who almost never publicly apologizes, these two posts are extremely blinding; what is even more glaring is the point in time they appeared. Just six weeks ago, SpaceX just completed the acquisition of xAI on an all-stock basis: SpaceX was valued at around $1 trillion, xAI was valued at around $250 billion, and the consolidated valuation reached $1.25 trillion. In other words, Musk just loaded an AI company with a valuation of up to 250 billion US dollars into a rocket company he controls, and immediately told the world that this company didn't set up a partnership for the first time. More than two months later, on May 20, SpaceX submitted an S-1 prospectus to the SEC and plans to be listed on the NASDAQ under the stock code SPCX. According to the prospectus and market reports, SpaceX aims to raise around $75 billion and is seeking a valuation of $1.75 trillion to $2 trillion. The listing date is tentatively scheduled for June 12 — Musk will celebrate his 55th birthday in two weeks. SpaceX's prospectus included not only Falcon 9 and Starlink, but also X's data, xAI's model, Colossus's computing power, the imagination of orbital data centers, and the AI ambitions that Musk was slow to drop after OpenAI. This isn't a...

79d agoWendy#AI #IPOs #OpenAI #SpaceX #SpaceX topics #Xai #public #depths #US stock topics #viewpoints #Musk

The founder of Anthropic and the president of OpenAI have a grudge: Dario banned Brockman from participating in the development of ChatGPT's predecessor due to meddling in the project to crowd out researchers

Comparative news, according to surveillance, the “Wall Street Journal” revealed that OpenAI president Greg Brockman (Greg Brockman) and the Amodei brothers and sisters (Dario Amodei and Daniela Amodei) had already had a major internal interpersonal conflict before Anthropic executives left the group. As a technical genius, Brockman is known within the company for his tough, bigfooting (bigfooting) management style. He tried hard to avoid executive meetings and tried to spend 80% of his time writing code, yet he often forcibly intervened in team projects without understanding the background, trampled on the work of others, and caused complaints from many colleagues. Managing friction peaked early in OpenAI. Brockman overinterfered with the project, leaving a top researcher excluded, and completely angered Dario Amodei (Dario Amodei), the project leader at the time and later founder of Anthropic. Amodai immediately took extreme precautions, directly prohibiting Brockman from meddling in the development of the predecessor project that led to the birth of ChatGPT. This rift in the workplace not only prompted the Amodai team to leave and found Anthropic in the future, but also laid the groundwork for later power struggles. When co-founder Ilya Sutskever (Ilya Sutskever) ousted Sam Ultrman during the Thanksgiving Day coup in 2023, one of the core reasons given was that Ultraman couldn't control Brockman. Their personal relationships are equally dramatic. Brockman fell in love with Anna at first sight and began dating in 2018. Today's Anthropic president Daniela Amodei (Daniela Amodei) was convinced at the time that the two would not get far and directly bet $100 with Brockman, insisting that Anna was definitely not his partner for life. A year later, the two got married and had a wedding at OpenAI headquarters, where robotic arms acted as groomsmen and delivered wedding rings. Daniela presented a $100 check at the scene as promised. After the giant broke up, the close relationship of the past finally completely broke down. Following the official departure of Sutskville (who was inseparable from Brockman) from OpenAI at the end of 2024, the two sides engaged in extremely painful negotiations to save each other. In the end, Brockman's wife Anna sent Sutskville a pot of cacti as a final farewell ceremony, symbolizing the end of an era.

83d ago

OpenAI and Anthropic CEOs both retract the prediction that “AI will cause a wave of unemployment”

Comparative news, according to Fortune magazine, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman (Sam Altman) and Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei (Dario Amodei) have successively changed their previous pessimistic attitude that “AI will disrupt white-collar employment.” Ultraman publicly acknowledged “misjudging” the short-term impact of AI on junior white-collar jobs and expressed his joy that there was no large-scale unemployment; Amoudai redefined AI automation as a “productivity multiplier for increasing efficiency by ten times.” The analysis points out that as the two companies plan to advance a major IPO with a valuation of nearly trillion US dollars within this year, they are abandoning “doomsday predictions” and glorifying the image of AI, with the aim of dispelling Wall Street investors' compliance and moral concerns. At the same time, recent empirical research from think tanks such as Yale Budget Labs also shows that currently there is no significant increase in unemployment in high-exposure AI jobs.

87d agoWendy

For every $1 OpenAI earns, how did Anthropic take the lead in turning a loss into a profit?

Author: Su Yang, Tencent Technology Original title: OpenAI “Earning One Dollar and Losing One Dollar”. Anthropic began making money in mid-May. The two AI giants revealed their undercards at the same time — OpenAI secretly submitted an IPO application, and Anthropic came up with a financial forecast for the first profitable quarter. According to the data, OpenAI's revenue for the first quarter was $5.7 billion, but for every dollar it earned, it lost $1.22. Anthropic's revenue for the same period was 4.8 billion US dollars, which is nearly 1 billion dollars behind. However, the forecast for the second quarter was a sharp increase in the month-on-month growth rate, reaching 10.9 billion US dollars, and achieving operating profit of about 559 million US dollars. This difference gives the outside world the impression that the family is a superstar with a trillion-dollar valuation, and they are still trying to be patient with the market. The other one is a former catcher and has quietly reached the threshold of profit. 01. 5.7 billion vs 4.8 billion people familiar with the matter revealed to The Information that OpenAI generated about 5.7 billion US dollars in revenue in the first quarter of this year, which is nearly 1 billion US dollars higher than its old rival Anthropic's revenue of 4.8 billion US dollars during the same period. Looking at these two numbers alone, it seems clear that OpenAI's leading edge is clear. OpenAI's financial results for the first quarter, source: The Information, revealed that there were three main factors driving OpenAI's growth in the first quarter, namely the explosion of the programming agent Codex, an increase in corporate sales, and ChatGPT test ads. The explosion of Codex shows that the developer community is in high demand for tools that can work directly. This actually overlaps with Anthropic's customer base. Testing the waters of the advertising business revealed OpenAI's anxiety about finding monetization exports in its huge pool of free users. OpenAI had an average of 905 million weekly active users in the first quarter, and peaked at 920 million in February. When users hit a very large benchmark, growth began to stall. Although it has 55 million paying consumer subscribers, up from 47 million at the end of last year, the conversion rate is still very low compared to its more than 900 million active weekly users. Moreover, this portion of the corresponding inference cost is also a huge black hole for OpenAI. On the other hand, Anthropic's first-quarter revenue of $4.8 billion came almost entirely from what it does best: selling AI models to businesses and developers. It doesn't have a huge free consumer base that needs huge subsidies like ChatGPT. This difference may be a key factor for it to surpass its old rivals in the future. 02. The fastest counterattack in history According to financial data disclosed to investors by Anthropic obtained by the Wall Street Journal, the company expects second-quarter revenue to reach $10.9 billion, more than double that of the first quarter. Moreover, its revenue growth rate has surpassed that of Google and Facebook before the IPO. By business, Anthropic's operating profit, Source: AnthropicThe Information notes that by April 2026, Anthropic's annualized revenue was over $30 billion, while OpenAI's annualized revenue was approximately $25 billion. At the May 2026 developer conference, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei joked that their recent revenue growth had reached the point where it was “hard to handle.” Anthropic's revenue growth, forecast in red for December 2025. Source: The InformationAnthropic expects to achieve operating profit of approximately $559 million in the second quarter. This is also a landmark event. Last summer, the company shared predictions with investors that it won't be profitable for the whole year until at least 2028. However, operating profit excludes equity incentive expenses, and considering subsequent huge computational expenses, Anthropic may not be able to maintain profits throughout the fiscal year, but it proves one thing: AI model companies, with enterprise customers at the core, can run through the profit model in the short term. On the other hand, OpenAI...

92d agoburnking#Anthropic #OpenAI