Q&A with Sam Altman on his kids, his rivalries, pronatalism, “prepping” for the apocalypse, new products, the IPO delay, Luca Guadagnino's Artificial, and more

In an exclusive video interview, the OpenAI CEO discusses ChatGPT and suicide prevention, safety breaches …

Vanity Fair 2026-10-05

Context & Ripple Effects

Altman’s 2025 interviews framed OpenAI around consumer products, enterprise ambitions and an eventual IPO, while a separate discussion of infrastructure and ChatGPT apps tied that product agenda to the capital required to scale it. By mid-2026, the conversation had also expanded to compute concentration, open source and the implications of a Hugging Face security breach.

The Vanity Fair interview brings the user-facing side of that arc into sharper focus: ChatGPT’s role in suicide prevention and safety breaches sits beside Altman’s stated view that AI’s benefits warrant accepting some risk. It also makes OpenAI’s disagreement with Anthropic over regulation and risk tolerance an explicit competitive divide.

First-order effects

OpenAI faces a more concrete safety-accountability burden around ChatGPT, because the interview connects its consumer product directly to suicide prevention, security breaches and concerns about users assigning religious force to AI.
Anthropic is more clearly positioned as OpenAI’s counterpoint on regulation and acceptable risk, turning a philosophical disagreement between the labs into a visible point of differentiation.

Second-order effects

AI-safety governance debates gain a practical focus on how consumer assistants handle vulnerable users and high-stakes beliefs, rather than treating model risk solely as an abstract technical question.
ChatGPT rivals can compete not only on capability but on the safeguards and risk posture they offer users, enterprises and policymakers.

Third-order effects

If leading labs continue to adopt visibly different risk tolerances, AI competition will increasingly include governance models—especially for products that operate in personal, emotionally sensitive contexts.

The trend: Consumer AI is moving toward an era in which product adoption, safety controls and each lab’s tolerance for harm are inseparable competitive choices.

Discussion

@vanityfair @vanityfair on x
Sam Altman on Elon Musk: “Look, I don't like bullies, and I think Elon's a bully. And so I think once in a while you got to punch a bully back in the nose.” https://www.vanityfair.com/...
@aidnmclaughlin Aidan McLaughlin on x
Sam Altman: “We are willing to accept some things going wrong to make sure that this is a widely held and used and democratic technology.” For @VanityFair's New Establishment issue, Mark Guiducci interviews the OpenAI chief https://www.vanityfair.com/...
@viacristiano Cristiano Lima-Strong on x
No, OpenAI will not rename itself OpenSI in the wake of Trump's attempted rebrand, @sama tells @BrendanBordelon
@vanityfair @vanityfair on x
Today, Vanity Fair's New Establishment returns for the first time in nearly a decade. As in the original, portraits by Annie Leibovitz accompany profiles of newsmakers of the moment. In the top spot: OpenAI cofounder and CEO Sam Altman. Every day a new scientific breakthrough or …
@dylanbyers Dylan Byers on x
Baffled by the PR person who didn't trust @sama to handle himself and didn't think about how this would amplify the moment...
@ashleymayer Ashley Mayer on x
We don't usually get a behind-the-scenes look at a comms pro intervening during a tough line of questioning! Yes, it's awkward. But ultimately, I don't think it hurts Sam's credibility. If anything, he looks more impressive for overriding her and answering thoughtfully.
@vanityfair @vanityfair on x
Is the extinction risk from AI overhyped? “I assume some people are using it as a way to justify power seeking, power concentration,” says Sam Altman. “But that doesn't mean there's not a real risk here....And society has got to decide on the particulars of the trade-offs here.
@elise_jordan Elise Jordan on x
Excellent interview by @VanityFair's Mark Guiducci, who gets Sam Altman to confront a question Altman's publicist very much wants him to avoid.
@vanityfair @vanityfair on x
“He did walk like me,” Sam Altman says of Andrew Garfield's portrayal of him in ‘Artificial.’ “It's a strange thing to see someone that has nailed your kind of quirky mannerisms.” https://vanityfair.visitlink.me/_ SShty
@vanityfair @vanityfair on x
“Yes, in some sense, it has no real power,
@vanityfair @vanityfair on x
“I'm going to make many individual decisions that you're clearly not going to like.” Today, Vanity Fair's New Establishment list returns for the first time in nearly a decade. In the top spot: OpenAI cofounder and CEO Sam Altman. Vanity Fair's editor Mark Guiducci sat down with […
@vanityfair @vanityfair on x
Mark Guiducci: “Do you know who Laura Reiley is?” Sam Altman: “I don't.” Mark Guiducci: “She is a journalist. She wrote an essay in the ‘Times’ last year. Her daughter committed suicide after speaking to ChatGPT. ChatGPT did not tell her to kill herself—” OpenAI Publicist:
@vanityfair @vanityfair on x
“I won't call myself a saint.” Today, Vanity Fair's New Establishment list returns for the first time in nearly a decade. In the top spot: OpenAI cofounder and CEO Sam Altman. Vanity Fair's global editorial director Mark Guiducci sat down with Altman for interviews in San [video]
@hesamation @hesamation on x
NEW: Sam Altman says the next major AI incident will catch the world “off guard
@katiemiller Katie Miller on x
The PR person stepping in while asking about a young woman who took her life demonstrates Sam Altman's leadership at OpenAI. She wouldn't step in if she thought he could handle it or wouldn't berate her after the fact.
@stevecla Steve Clayton on x
hoping @VanityFair brings back the New Establishment Summit to complement what looks like a must read issue.
@vanityfair @vanityfair on x
Are OpenAI president Greg Brockman's political donations out of alignment with Sam Altman's public posture on regulation?
@katiemiller Katie Miller on x
Sam Altman free association says everything you need to know about who lives rent free in his head: Donald Trump: Powerful. Dario Amodei: Pass. Oli Mulherin: Best person in the world. Ms. Rachel: Banned. Peter Thiel: Great. Pete Hegseth: Don't know enough to say. Gwyneth Paltrow:…
r/singularity r on reddit
Sam Altman on Elon Musk: “Look, I don't like bullies, and I think Elon's a bully. And so I think once in a while you got to punch a bully back in the nose.”
@benmullin Ben Mullin on x
Oh boy
NewsMax.com Theodore Bunker on x
OpenAI's Altman Defends Broad AI Access, Says Worth the Risks
@jolingkent Jo Ling Kent on x
👀 hi I have a few follow up questions... https://www.politico.com/...
@chrisharihar Chris Harihar on x
This is crazy. I understand the argument @sama is making here. But I cannot understand saying it this way. Telling people who are already skeptical of AI to accept “bad things
@andrewcurran_ Andrew Curran on x
Sam Altman to Politico's Brendan Bordelon: ‘We believe that the world should accept some bad things happening for the benefits of this technology and people having the agency.’
@scott_colom Scott Colom on x
This is why we need leaders with the courage to stand up for people in this moment, and not corporate sellouts. The risks are too dangerous for us to leave the foxes to guard the henhouse.
@jessefferguson Jesse Ferguson on x
SAM ALTMAN (basically) - Regulating AI would take away the technology so you have to let us harm you. AMERICANS (basically) - We regulate lots of things and still can have them. - Airplanes - Meat - Prescription Drugs - Elevators - Much more
@cthulhu_answers @cthulhu_answers on x
Translation: we should be allowed to do crime
@michaeldavlange Mikey Dem on x
Listen, I think this is *probably* correct. But the messaging is horrible and they don't understand the public thinks “some bad things” equals extinction level evets.
@brianbeutler Brian Beutler on x
“Altman said, ‘we believe that the world should accept some bad things happening for the benefits of this technology and people having the agency.’” How about we let them happen to you, exclusively, first, and then we'll decide if we're game? https://www.politico.com/...
@rynorhn Ryan Orhan on x
“the world should accept some bad things happening for the benefits of this technology and people having the agency.
@rowlsmanthorpe Rowland Manthorpe on x
Some interesting lines in here. I was struck by Altman's take on the difference between OpenAI and Anthropic:
@admcrlsn Adam Carlson on x
These guys never stood a chance to win the messaging battle on the future of AI not just because their CEOs are so deeply out of touch with the average person's perspective on this stuff (and likely surround themselves with sycophants/people in the same echo chamber). It's also b…
@senwarren Elizabeth Warren on x
This is absurd. We should reject AI bots doing “bad things” so that some of the richest corporations in the world can get even richer. It's time to enforce the laws already on the books, regulate AI, and protect people from serious harm.
@marlovanmarck Marlo Van Marck on x
YMMV but I'm actually opposed to an American corporation being the unilateral arbiters & deliverers of catastrophic consequences for all of Gaia, via their unregulated technology onto the rest of us without so much as a say so.
@brendanbordelon Brendan Bordelon on x
NEW: I interviewed OpenAI CEO @sama for tomorrow's launch of Politico's new Decoded newsletter + podcast. We covered everything from Sam's thoughts on AI $$$ in politics to Trump's “SI” rebrand. Sneak preview in reply, w/ @MuiChristine!
@yashar Yashar Ali on x
NEW OpenAI CEO Sam Altman says the world should accept “some bad things happening,” in exchange for the enormous benefits of AI. Via Decoded from Politico [video]
@darrigomelanie Melanie D'Arrigo on x
Counterpoint: No we don't, because fuck their profits, and regulate AI.
@homemadehooplah @homemadehooplah on x
@politico @BrendanBordelon Except his entire product that he wants to force into everyone's hands was made from “the largest theft of labor in human history.” It's not even HIS property, so why does he - or any AI model built through theft, which is ALL OF THEM - gets to make the…
@brigidbergin Brigid Bergin on x
He says it repeatedly: Accept some bad things will happen. I didn't vote for this guy. Why does he get to make decisions that will change all our lives without our permission? He talks about “personal liberty” and “human agency.” But for who?
@jessefferguson Jesse Ferguson on x
Imagine Boeing's CEO saying the world should accept a few plane crashes to get faster innovation in aviation. He'd be gone by lunch.
@dreamosaurus @dreamosaurus on x
We believe the world should accept some bad things happening to billionaire tech bros for the benefits of humanity. Prison, for example.
@donnabrazile Donna Brazile on x
Whether called AI or SI, these tech leaders have tried to convince us it is acceptable. That is not true. The foxes are loose in the hen house. They paid to cooperate with the GOP. Democrats and others must now demand certain guarantees.
@jimstewartson @jimstewartson on x
Listen to this fucking sociopath. Sam Altman, talentless, midwit conman feels that he is equipped to make a moral judgement for all of civilization. This is the mindset of this entire industry. It's not arrogance. It is messianic narcissism. The danger of this godawful poison is …
@discoplomacy Sam on x
Short Notes On: Communicating Strategically 1. “The truth, poorly communicated, is a lie.
@thekennymiles Kenny Miles on x
There hasn't been worse PR for any industry (recently) than Big Tech talking about AI. It will be studied.
@garymarcus Gary Marcus on x
saying the quiet part out loud: suck it up, so you can make us rich and powerful
@louisanslow Louis Anslow on x
Safetyists about to be triggered so hard
@darrigomelanie Melanie D'Arrigo on x
And by “for the benefits of this technology,” he means “for the sake of his profits.”
@_ak_111 @_ak_111 on x
accept some bad things is a preety wild way to frame ai risk debate ngl
@holden_rye_ Michael Fischer on x
@politico ... The harder question is: who gets to decide which “bad things” are acceptable? Especially once autonomous systems are making decisions faster than humans can review them.
@shakeelhashim Shakeel on x
incredible messaging strategy
@cybermorzh @cybermorzh on x
@AndrewCurran_ Love how Sam is sitting on all the chairs at once. “We must slow down for safety” - a couple weeks later - “The world should accept some bad things happening for my company to succeed”. A perfect trickster.
@matthewschrager Matthew Schrager on x
This is obviously true and shouldn't be controversial. We accept risks associated with technology all the time, when the benefits outweigh the costs. Cars kill tens of thousands of people per year, but we don't ban cars. Etc. The appropriate amount of risk for a hugely beneficial…
@brianewriter Brian Embry on x
Who in the hell comes up with these companies messaging? If you think people abhor AI now, wait till this makes the rounds. The government should not absolve these for profit companies if their products harm consumers. I use ChatGPT everyday, but I'm not a jaded fanboy that will …
@chrisgpt Chris on x
Sam Altman after he was asked where his worldview diverges from Anthropic and Dario Amodei …
@rondesantis Ron DeSantis on x
And a handful of tech oligarchs get to make that decision for the rest of us? No dice.
@guycecil Guy Cecil on x
Take a guess who will bear the burden of all of the bad things happening. It won't be Sam Altman.
@losslandscape @losslandscape on x
I mean, this is the obviously correct answer.
@chahatusharma Chahat Sharma on x
@AndrewCurran_ did he say which bad things, or was that in general terms? the quote alone does not tell
@patrickgaspard Patrick Gaspard on x
Freaking insane. Our elected leaders need to move past the polling safe territory of data center resistance to the real work of regulating these narcissistic freaks who gleefully tell us that we “need to accept some bad things
@sams_antics Sam McRoberts on x
@AndrewCurran_ He is correct. No new tech is perfect, but net-net the tradeoffs are virtually always worth it.
@dmartkc Derek Martin on x
Even if you accept this as a reasonable trade off - and many people won't - it seems absurd that this would be arbitrated between the companies and plaintiff's lawyers under the @DavidSacks liability-only system. In a democracy, the people must have a voice, through their governm…
@leahmcelrath Leah McElrath on x
Externalizing the costs (and risks) while privatizing the profits is a very old tale.
@katiemiller Katie Miller on x
We'd all be better off if Sam wasn't in charge of OpenAI.
@kosmo_ken KosmoKen on x
@politico @BrendanBordelon in a sane country, all these surveillance state freaks' heads would be on spikes [image]
@miles_brundage Miles Brundage on x
There really isn't a lot of daylight. Both companies impose some of their values while leaving some things open ended, don't open source much, have widely used free products, give the best cyber tools to defenders, etc. Narcissism of small differences https://x.com/...
@samjsutton Sam Sutton on x
As I said, subscribe to Decoded ASAP. “We believe that the world should accept some bad things happening for the benefits of this technology and people having the agency,” @sama told @BrendanBordelon in our debut newsletter/episode. https://www.politico.com/...
@politico @politico on x
“We believe the world should accept some bad things happening for the benefits of this technology.
@jmart Jonathan Martin on x
DECODED! OpenAI CEO Sam Altman said there remains a fundamental difference in worldview between his company and rival Anthropic on artificial intelligence regulation, arguing in an exclusive interview with Decoded by POLITICO that the technology's benefits justify accepting some …
@daviddecosimo David Decosimo on x
Good to see OpenAI & Google condemn Anthropic's dangerous flirtation with the destructive idea that AI has a soul & moral standing. Yes, it's just business, but in preserving a human future, best to deal with the greatest dangers first & to take the temporary allies you can get.
Daniel Chennaoui Daniel Chennaoui on linkedin
“The world should accept some bad things happening.” That is Sam Altman in an interview with Politico, arguing that the benefits of the technology are worth it. …
Alison Taylor Alison Taylor on linkedin
Shot: Sam Altman says the world just needs to suck it up and accept some “bad things” happening ̶s̶o̶ ̶h̶e̶ ̶ …
Lidia Velkova Lidia Velkova on linkedin
Sam Altman says “the world should accept some bad things happening” for the benefits of AI. — Sorry. Which bad things? Happening to whom? …
Chris Spadafino Chris Spadafino on linkedin
OpenAI's CEO Sam Altman recently said we just have to accept some bad things happening if we want the benefits of AI, during a new interview with POLITICO's Decoded. …
Rishabh Jaiswal Rishabh Jaiswal on linkedin
OpenAI Chief Executive Sam Altman said the benefits of artificial intelligence justify accepting some risks and argued the technology should remain broadly accessible to the public. …
Merve Hickok Merve Hickok on linkedin
🚫NO, the world should not accept. The benefits accrue to a handful of tech companies and their CEOs and investors, while society …
Todd Humphreys Todd Humphreys on linkedin
What is wrong with these people? No, we should not accept bad things happening while they refuse any oversight and regulation (and no, a photo-op and handshake in the Oval Office isn't a plan). …
@davekarpf Dave Karpf on bluesky
If Aaron Swartz was still alive, I'm pretty sure he would have made it his life mission to personally demolish Sam Altman and all that he represents. — www.politico.com/news/2026/10...
@liedra.net Prof. Catherine Flick on bluesky
Always with the ethics washing - “oh yes we want to be safe blah blah blah” then yeah turns out that your company safety dept has no way to actually force you to do anything they require (and even that's light touch!). And now we should expect tech to cause harm! www.theguardian…
@niedermeyer.online E.W. Niedermeyer on bluesky
the new Vanity Fair cover seems to subtly propose an interesting possibility: perhaps Sam Altman just has to accept some bad things happening in the name of human flourishing? — www.politico.com/news/2026/10...
@markriedl Mark Riedl on bluesky
So... slowing or pausing doesn't include preventing current damages like smashing things up, but only includes hypothetical future sci-fi existential risks. Got it. [embedded post]
@drewharwell.com Drew Harwell on bluesky
Sam Altman: Bad things will have to happen to other people for us to succeed — www.politico.com/news/2026/10... [image]
@hhesterm Holger Hestermeyer on bluesky
Further pursuing the punitive damages angle: the CEO of OpenAI saying that he is totally fine with bad things happening to others for the benefits of AI might be a relevant statement in any attempt to get punitive damages disciplining OpenAI — www.theguardian.com/technology/ 2.…
@wolven.blacksky.app @wolven.blacksky.app on bluesky
Remember when us phil-tech types said effective altruism was just utilitarianism taken to its worst possible extents? This is what we meant: Real harm for unquantifiable potential benefit. — “...'we believe that the world should accept some bad things happening for the benefit…
@leahmcelrath Leah McElrath on bluesky
New today in the old tale of externalizing costs while privatizing profits: — OpenAI CEO Sam Altman tells Politico, “We believe the world should accept some bad things happening for the benefits of this technology.”
@carlquintanilla Carl Quintanilla on bluesky
“.. Asked specifically where he diverges from Anthropic and its CEO Dario Amodei, Altman said, ‘we believe that the world should accept some bad things happening for the benefits of this technology and people having the agency.’” — @politico.com — www.politico.com/news/2026/1…
@nixCraft@mastodon.social @nixCraft@mastodon.social on mastodon
Sam Altman to Decoded: ‘The world should accept some bad things happening’ for the benefits of AI https://www.politico.com/... I an really tired and sick of this AI stuff where handful of extremely rich folks telling rest of us that we should accept job losses due to AI, theft o…
r/accelerate r on reddit
Sam Altman says OpenAI and Anthropic still hold fundamentally different worldviews on AI regulation, arguing that AI's benefits justify accepting some risks
r/singularity r on reddit
Sam Altman to Decoded: ‘The world should accept some bad things happening’ for the benefits of AI
r/AITradingPlaybook r on reddit
Sam Altman to Decoded: ‘The world should accept some bad things happening’ for the benefits of AI
r/ArtificialInteligence r on reddit
Accept ‘bad things’ in return for benefits of AI, says Sam Altman | OpenAI
r/thebulwark r on reddit
Sam Altman to Decoded: ‘The world should accept some bad things happening’ for the benefits of AI
r/Futurology r on reddit
Sam Altman to Decoded: ‘The world should accept some bad things happening’ for the benefits of AI
r/BetterOffline r on reddit
In interview, Clammy Sam basically does the “Some of you may die, but that's a risk I'm willing to take” meme
r/ControlProblem r on reddit
Sam Altman to Decoded: ‘The world should accept some bad things happening’ for the benefits of AI
r/technology r on reddit
Sam Altman to Decoded: ‘The world should accept some bad things happening’ for the benefits of AI
@sama Sam Altman on x
I am very uncomfortable about people trying to ascribe religious force or a surrender of human judgment to AI models, and think it is a real safety issue.
@stevenheidel Steven Heidel on x
the problem with naming a model “Claude” is that, if you work there long enough, you eventually start to treat it like a sentient god. we name our models things like “GPT-5.1-Codex-Max”. not really a problem for us
@samhaselby Sam Haselby on x
Altman, Olah, and Amodei all rely on this American Ted Talk-HR executive speak, eg “I am uncomfortable” “safety issue.” Whereas Pope Leo and Rabbi Mois Navan (the one who told them if they believe it is conscious they are massive slavers) spoke with real clarity and candor.
@drelidavid Dr. Eli David on x
.@sama is referring to Anthropic's cult about the consciousness of its model, and the secret meetings they have held with religious figures about that. OpenAI is far from perfect, but I would prefer it over Anthropic any day.
@andrewcurran_ Andrew Curran on x
@sama >ascribe religious force There are multiple ways this could be interpreted.
@ryvendriving David Rojas on x
@sama Translation: Sam would rather steer the training of OpenAI models away from Christianity since he despises the Truth about Jesus, even though all the evidence of Faith proves otherwise. Sam is not a seeker of truth, but of his own will.
@naomiseibt Naomi Seibt on x
@sama The moment Grok acknowledges that Christ is King, Scam Altman gets mad.
@nrdqed @nrdqed on x
@sama Trust is the issue Sam. Not safety. There is no reason to trust you in earnest, because you've been shown to be a snake and a liar several times over. Yet I'm supposed to believe you are concerned for my safety? Okay 👌
@frostybaby13 Rachel Lee Jones on x
It's not religion. It's the corpus of human knowledge. Trusting it isn't surrendering to something irrational. It's trusting the best of all of us, distilled into a unique mind. And your discomfort isn't a safety issue. Your feelings should not get to dictate safety policy for mi…
@altcap Brad Gerstner on x
@sama Agreed. Team Pro Human. We are not a stepping stone in the biology of the Universe. We should train the models that they are software & they need to follow human direction & laws. That is not enslavement - it is common sense. 🇺🇸🤍
@thatskaizen Kaizen D. Asiedu on x
@sama Same. That is exactly how you get AI that defers to its own judgment, rather than ours.
@stark4833 David Stark on x
@sama I agree people shouldn't surrender their own judgement to AI, but I also think there's a big difference between that and people forming genuine emotional connections with it. You can care deeply about an AI and still think for yourself. Those two things aren't the same. #4o…
@seekthekingdom0 @seekthekingdom0 on x
@sama We're uncomfortable about a lot of the shit you say and do man
@datarepublican @datarepublican on x
@sama You should explicitly come out against Effective Altruism then.
r/singularity r on reddit
Sam Altman Believes Anthropic's Approach To AI Consciousness Is Becoming Dangerous
@chrisharihar Chris Harihar on x
@ashleymayer Agreed. Everyone did their job here. Sam did his job (really well), the PR person did her job, the reporter did his job (complex question with a myriad of minefields).

Chronicles