.png)
April 28, 2025
Artificial intelligence (AI) is fundamentally changing how we communicate. Chatbots like ChatGPT are ubiquitous and used by millions of people every day. But what at first glance appears to be a simple conversation has a complex technical background with considerable costs. One aspect often overlooked is the cost of politeness. As it turns out, a simple "thank you" or "please" to ChatGPT can have financial implications in the millions for OpenAI, the company behind the chatbot.
ChatGPT's functionality is based on the processing of text input, called prompts. Every prompt, no matter how short or long, requires computing power. The more words a prompt contains, the more data needs to be processed. This means higher energy consumption in the data centers that operate the AI. Even seemingly insignificant additions like polite phrases contribute to this increased resource demand.
Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, recently confirmed this connection on the platform X (formerly Twitter). When asked about the costs incurred by polite prompts, he replied: "Tens of millions of dollars, well spent – you never know." This statement raises questions and illustrates the complex cost calculations behind operating AI models.
The tendency to treat chatbots politely is widespread. Studies show that a large proportion of users employ polite forms of address when interacting with AI systems. The reasons for this are varied. Some users act out of habit, others out of a desire to treat the technology respectfully. Some experts even suspect that polite prompts could lead to better results, as the AI reflects the tone and depth of detail in the request.
The discussion about the cost of politeness draws attention to a larger context: the ecological footprint of AI usage. Operating AI models is extremely energy-intensive. Studies show that even generating short texts can cause significant electricity consumption. Although polite phrases only make up a small part of the total cost, they highlight the resource expenditure behind every single AI request.
Altman's statement about the million-dollar cost of politeness raises questions about transparency and sustainability. Is his statement a PR strategy or is there a long-term vision for human-AI interaction behind it? Regardless of the intention, the anecdote underscores the need for an open discussion about the resource consumption of AI models. In the future, more sustainable approaches must be developed to minimize the ecological footprint of AI and to capture the true costs of the AI revolution – beyond anecdotes about digital etiquette.
```