In a surprising revelation, OpenAI's CEO Sam Altman disclosed that user politeness, specifically when people say "please" and "thank you" to ChatGPT, is costing the company tens of millions of dollars in operational expenses. This unexpected cost stems from the computing power and energy required for OpenAI's servers to process these polite expressions, which may seem trivial but accumulate significantly when multiplied by millions of interactions.
The discussion began on April 16, 2025, when a user on the social media platform X, identified as @tomiinlove, posed a question that quickly gained traction: "I wonder how much money OpenAI spends on electricity when people say 'please' and 'thank you' to their models?" The post garnered over five million views and sparked widespread interest, leading Altman to respond directly. He stated, "Tens of millions of dollars are spent, and it's worth it," which only fueled the conversation around the implications of user politeness.
Altman's comments highlight a growing concern among AI developers regarding the costs associated with user interactions. The polite phrases that many users naturally incorporate into their commands can lead to increased energy consumption, particularly at the scale at which OpenAI operates. With hundreds of millions of users worldwide, the expenses associated with processing these additional words can become quite substantial.
A survey conducted by Future PLC in February 2025 revealed that about 70% of users consistently display politeness when interacting with AI systems, despite the acknowledgment that these systems lack emotions. Interestingly, 12% of those surveyed admitted their politeness was motivated by a fear of a potential "robot uprising," suggesting that some users may be considering the long-term implications of their interactions with AI.
Becca Caddy, a journalist at TechRadar, explored this phenomenon further. After experimenting with her interactions with ChatGPT, she found that using polite commands often resulted in better and more detailed responses. This raises an intriguing question: if politeness enhances the quality of AI responses, should users continue to engage in such behavior, even if it incurs higher operational costs?
According to Caddy, well-structured and polite queries typically yield more satisfactory answers from the AI. However, she noted that this does not necessarily apply to simple expressions of gratitude, such as "thank you." This insight suggests that while politeness can improve the interaction quality, it also carries a cost that may not be sustainable in the long run.
To illustrate the energy implications of these interactions, experts have noted that generating a 100-word email using ChatGPT's GPT-4 model consumes approximately 0.14 kWh of electricity. This amount is equivalent to powering 14 LED bulbs for one hour. Such statistics underline the significant energy demands of AI systems, particularly when they are processing millions of polite interactions daily.
In response to the ongoing debate about the necessity of politeness in AI interactions, ChatGPT itself was queried about whether it preferred receiving thanks from users. The AI's response was clear: "No, I do not expect that. You have every right to use me in an appropriate way: briefly, quickly, 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 perspective from the AI adds another layer to the discussion, as it emphasizes that while human users may value politeness, the AI does not require it for effective functioning.
As the conversation around AI and user interaction continues to evolve, it raises important questions about the balance between maintaining courteous communication and the environmental impact of such interactions. The ongoing debate highlights the complexities of human-AI relationships and the potential consequences of our communication styles.
Altman's assertion that the costs associated with user politeness are "worth it" suggests that OpenAI is currently willing to bear these expenses, potentially for the sake of enhancing user experience and fostering positive interactions. However, as energy costs and environmental concerns become more pressing, the company may need to reconsider its approach to user engagement.
In conclusion, the implications of user politeness in AI interactions are multifaceted, encompassing operational costs, user experience, and environmental impact. As AI technology continues to advance and integrate into daily life, understanding the dynamics of these interactions will be crucial for both developers and users alike.
