this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2025
102 points (98.1% liked)

Hardware

4500 readers
215 users here now

All things related to technology hardware, with a focus on computing hardware.


Rules (Click to Expand):

  1. Follow the Lemmy.world Rules - https://mastodon.world/about

  2. Be kind. No bullying, harassment, racism, sexism etc. against other users.

  3. No Spam, illegal content, or NSFW content.

  4. Please stay on topic, adjacent topics (e.g. software) are fine if they are strongly relevant to technology hardware. Another example would be business news for hardware-focused companies.

  5. Please try and post original sources when possible (as opposed to summaries).

  6. If posting an archived version of the article, please include a URL link to the original article in the body of the post.


Some other hardware communities across Lemmy:

Icon by "icon lauk" under CC BY 3.0

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The original confusion stemmed from remarks made by CFO Sarah Friar, who said at a Bloomberg event that a federal “backstop” could help unlock investment for future data center expansion. Those comments, widely interpreted as a request for taxpayer guarantees, drew scrutiny given the scale of AI server costs and energy requirements.

So basically, the company's Chief Financial Officer explicitly stated that if the government took over the risk of loss, the company could get more money from investors who would then have nothing to lose. In other words, she was hoping for a preemptive guarantee of a bailout. Doesn't seem to me that there was any "confusion" or misunderstanding. OpenAI wants taxpayers to bear the risk of loss, while keeping profits for itself.

[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 10 points 2 weeks ago

They were confused that people saw right through it so fast.