At an enterprise level however, in the current workload I am dealing with, I can't get GPT-5 with high thinking to yield acceptable results; Gemini 2.5 Pro is crushing it in my tests.
Things are changing fast, and OpenAI seems to be the most dynamic player in terms of productization, but I'm still failing to see the moat.
plus, they didn't come up with it
Also Claude Opus 4.1 runs multidimensional circles around GPT-5 in my view. The only better use case for GPT-5 is when you need it to scrape the web for data
https://github.com/anthropics/claude-code/issues/8449
I hope they get destroyed in the AI race.
Like Apple vs every other computer maker.
Their platform mostly just works. Their api playground and docs are like 100x better than whatever garbage Anthropic has.
I think their UX is way better, and I can have long AF conversations without lagging. I can even change models in the same conversation. Basic shit Anthropic can’t figure out (they can fleece their 20x max subscribers tho)
I think if they get the AI human interface right, they will have their iPhone moment and 10x.
The only moat they have is the fact that you still need a GPU of some kind to reliably run even a tiny LLM. But the gap between what absolutely needs a server farm and what can be ran on a store bought gaming computer is quickly closing. You can already run mixture of experts models on gaming rigs with a high degree of usability compared to just one year ago. And that tech continues to be pushed further and further. It's only a matter of time until we see ChatGPT levels of access running on a quad core laptop totally offline. And once that happens, all such a system would need is the correct tooling on top of the AI model "brain" to make it usable.
And beyond that, what if you could have an AI model on an ASIC-style add-in card? Where's their moat then?
The token cache works on CUDA too. So yeah, the initial loadout sucks, but almost everything from then on is solid.
I mean you could say the same about a Macbook or iPhone/iPad, but for the actual people (not HN users lol) out there, they vastly prefer Apple to HP, Dell, etc. Due to their wallet some can't though.
There are literally thousands of other laptops that do the "same thing" (computer for doing shit).
Those who say otherwise are usually broke and know deep down that given proper purchasing power, they too would prefer to use a $3k Macbook Pro than some POS Dell.
Same with android.
Everyone knows it is cope based on PP, it is just in poor taste to actually call it like it is (idc)
So guess which app I prefer. That's the argument for Electron, and it is a good one.
Makes one wonder if Google will eventually sweep this field.
Moving from ChatGPT to Claude I would lose a lot of this valuable history.
Why use a car when you can just walk?
In the EU/UK you might not have rights to the memories right now, but you've rights to the inputs that created those memories in the first place.
Wouldn't be too hard to export your chat history into a different AI automatically.
No moat.
I think ChatGPT might turn into just “chat” as the next evolution of the term.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Bard/comments/1mkj4zi/chatgpt_pro_g...
I question this. Each vendor's offering has its own peculiar prompt quirks, does it not? Theoretically, switching RDBMS vendors (say Ora to Ingress) was also "an afernoon's work" but it never happened. The minutia is sticky with these sort of almost-but-not 'universal' interfaces.
The bigger problem is that there was never a way to move data between oracle->postgres in pure data form (i.e. point pgsql at your oracle folder and it "just works"). Migration is always a pain, and thus there is a substantial degree of stickiness, due to the cost of moving databases both in terms of risk and effort.
In contrast, vendors [1] are literally offering third party LLMS (such as claude) in addition to their own and offering one-click switching. This means users can try and if they desire switch with little friction.
[1] https://blog.jetbrains.com/ai/2025/09/introducing-claude-age...
All one needs to do is say something like “tell me all of personalization factors you have on me” and then just copy and paste that into the next LLM with “here’s stuff you should know about how to personalize output for me”
The vendors have all standardised on OpenAIs API surface - you can use OpenAIs SDK with a number of providers - so switching is very easy. There are also quite a few services that offer this as a service.
The real test is does a different LLM work - hence the need to evals to check.
True, but that's not really applicable here since LLMs themselves are not stable, and are certainly not stable within a vendors own product line. Like imagine if every time Oracle shipped a new version it was significantly behaviorally inconsistent with the previous one. Upgrading within a vendor and switching vendors ends up being the same task. So you quickly solidify on either
1) never upgrading, although with these being cloud services that's not necessarily feasible, and since LLMs are far from a local maxima in quality that'd quickly leave your stack obsolete
or
2) being forced to be robust, which makes it easy to migrate to other vendors
That applies even when you switch models within a vendor, though.
It turns out that they can use the same prompt system for all of them, with no changes and still solve 5/6 IMO problems. I think this is possibly iffy, since people might have updated the models etc., but it's pretty obvious that this kind of thing is how OpenAI are doing their multi-stage thinking thing for maths internally.
Consequently if prompt systems are this transferable for these hard problems, why wouldn't both they and individual prompts, be highly transferable in general?
Changing the LLM backend in some IDE is as complicated as selecting an option in a dropbox for those who integrate such a feature. They are other scenarios where it might be a bit more complicated to transition of course, but that's it.
The competitors have not come even close to Google's level of quality.
With LLMs, it's different. Gemini/Claude are as good, for the most part. And users don't care that much either - most use the standard free ChatGPT, which likely is worse than many competitors' paid models.
Meanwhile bing search is actually a platform, and is what then powers other "search engines" (duckduckgo, kagi, etc...)
Google Search would be moatless if not for the AdMob purchase.
As Peter Thiel says: “competition is for losers”
OpenAI will either use customer data to enshittify to a level never seen before, or they will go insolvent.
OpenAI turned that research into a product before Google, which is a huge failure on Google's part, but that's orthogonal to the invention of what powers modern models.
Maybe some are too young to remember the great migrations from/to MySpace, MSN, ICQ, AIM, Skype, local alternatives like StudiVZ, ..., where people used to keep in contact with friends. Facebook was just the latest and largest platform where people kept in touch and expressed themselves in some way. People adding each other on Facebook before others to keep in touch hasn't been a thing for 5 years. It's Instagram, Discord, and WhatsApp nowadays depending on your social circle (two of which Meta wisely bought because they saw the writing on the wall).
If I open Facebook nowadays, then out of ~130 people I used to keep in touch with through that platform, pretty much nobody is still doing anything on there. The only sign of life will be some people showing as online because they've the facebook app installed to use direct messaging.
No, people easily migrate between these platforms. All it takes is put your new handles (discord ID/phone number/etc) as a sticky so people know where to find you. And especially children will always use whichever platform their parents don't.
Small caveat: This is a German perspective. I don't doubt there's some countries where Facebook is still doing well.
No? It's rare for these platforms to survive, the one that was closest to challenging Facebook was kneecapped by the US government.
The time between the founding of MySpace to Facebook was a little over a year. Instagram has been the largest social network for close to decade now, and it's not like others haven't been trying. META is up 600% over last 3 years. I'm really question your definition of the word "dying"
When you realize this, you realize that a lot of other supposedly valuable tech companies operate in the exact same way. Worrying that our parents' retirement depends heavily on their valuations!
Maybe you should short the stock to hedge your parents' retirement :)