In a surprising revelation, Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI, disclosed that user politeness is costing the company tens of millions of dollars in operational expenses. This came in response to a query from a social media user, @tomiinlove, who asked how much electricity OpenAI spends when people say 'please' and 'thank you' to their artificial intelligence models. Altman’s response, which highlighted the significant costs associated with these polite expressions, has sparked a lively discussion about the implications of user behavior on AI systems.
On April 16, 2025, the question posed by @tomiinlove quickly garnered over 5 million views and hundreds of thousands of interactions, reflecting a keen public interest in the intersection of technology and everyday communication. Altman’s reply, stating that the costs run into "tens of millions of dollars," was accompanied by an affirmation that this expense is justified, suggesting that OpenAI values user engagement, even if it comes at a high financial cost.
The costs mentioned by Altman stem from the computational power and energy required to process additional polite phrases like "please" and "thank you." Every interaction with AI systems like ChatGPT requires substantial processing resources, and as user interactions multiply—especially given the hundreds of millions of users engaging with these platforms—the cumulative costs can become significant.
According to a survey conducted by Future PLC in February, which included over 1,000 participants, about 70% of users exhibit politeness when communicating with AI. Interestingly, 12% of respondents admitted that their courteousness is motivated by concerns over a potential "robot uprising" in the future. This raises an intriguing question: if politeness incurs significant costs, should users reconsider their courteous phrases when interacting with AI?
While the idea of politeness in human-AI interactions might seem trivial, the reality is that each word contributes to the overall computational load. For instance, generating a 100-word email using ChatGPT’s GPT-4 model consumes approximately 0.14 kWh of electricity, which is equivalent to powering 14 LED bulbs for one hour. This example illustrates how seemingly innocuous phrases can add up to substantial energy consumption, particularly in an era where data centers are already under scrutiny for their environmental impact.
Becca Caddy, a journalist for TechRadar, shared her insights on the matter, noting that she experimented with omitting polite phrases while using ChatGPT. She discovered that well-structured, polite queries often yield better, more detailed responses from the AI, prompting her to question whether politeness might become a factor that AI systems favor in the future. This suggests a potential trade-off: while being polite may enhance the quality of AI responses, it also increases operational costs and energy usage.
Altman’s comment about the costs being "worth it" hints at OpenAI’s broader strategy regarding user engagement and experience. The company appears willing to absorb these costs, possibly in the interest of fostering a more positive interaction between users and AI. However, the debate surrounding the most responsible and effective way to communicate with AI continues to evolve.
Moreover, the implications of this discussion extend beyond mere operational costs; they touch on the ethical considerations of AI development and human interaction. As AI systems become more integrated into daily life, the manner in which users communicate with these technologies may influence their future design and functionality.
In a direct inquiry to ChatGPT about whether it desires thanks from users, the AI responded, "No, I don't expect that. You have every right to use me as appropriate: concise, fast, without 'please' and 'thank you'. This does not affect my work. I am not offended, I am not tired, and I do not need politeness to respond qualitatively." This response underscores the notion that while users may feel compelled to express politeness, AI systems do not possess emotions or preferences in the same way humans do.
As discussions around AI and user interaction continue to unfold, it’s clear that the relationship between humans and machines is complex and multifaceted. The challenge remains: how do we balance the benefits of polite communication with the environmental and operational costs associated with it?
Ultimately, the ongoing dialogue about politeness in AI interactions may lead to new insights not only about AI technology but also about our own communication habits and their implications in a digital age. As we navigate this evolving landscape, the choices we make in our interactions with AI could shape the future of these technologies and our relationship with them.
