In a recent LinkedIn post, Dan Sherrard-Smith discusses significant concerns regarding the funding and ethical implications tied to OpenAI’s ChatGPT subscriptions. Sherrard-Smith highlights that user subscription money may inadvertently be supporting political activities and controversial government applications, urging users to be aware of where their payments are directed.
The core of Sherrard-Smith’s argument centers on the financial and political actions of OpenAI’s leadership. He points to a substantial donation made by Greg Brockman, OpenAI’s president, to a Trump-affiliated Super PAC.
“Greg Brockman, OpenAI’s president, donated $25 million to Trump’s MAGA Super PAC. The single largest donation in their latest filing.”
As Dan Sherrard-Smith notes, this donation raises questions about the alignment of OpenAI’s leadership with the values of its user base. He further elaborates on the potential implications of such funding, suggesting that subscription revenue plays a direct role in these financial decisions.
Ethical Concerns Over Technology Application
Beyond political donations, Sherrard-Smith also raises alarms about how OpenAI’s technology is being utilized by government agencies. He specifically mentions the use of ChatGPT technology by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to screen job applicants.
“It allows ICE to use ChatGPT technology to screen job applicants for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.”
According to Dan Sherrard-Smith, this application of AI technology by a government entity, funded in part by user subscriptions, presents a significant ethical dilemma. He argues that users may not be aware of or consent to their subscription fees contributing to such uses.
Lobbying Efforts and Regulatory Landscape
Sxrightarrow-Smith further details OpenAI’s extensive lobbying efforts, suggesting a strategy to influence the regulatory environment for AI. He states that OpenAI is investing heavily in a lobbying group that opposes regulations on AI development.
“OpenAI is spending $125 million on a major lobbying group that attacks any politician who tries to regulate AI.”
In Dan Sherrard-Smith’s view, this significant financial commitment to lobbying could shape the future of AI regulation, potentially giving undue influence to a single political figure. He implies that this strategy, funded by user subscriptions, aims to ensure that only specific political interests dictate the rules governing AI development.
User Power and Alternatives
Despite these concerns, Dan Sherrard-Smith emphasizes that users still hold considerable power. He highlights the declining market share of ChatGPT and OpenAI’s financial challenges, suggesting that the company is reliant on continued subscription revenue.
“ChatGPT’s market share has collapsed from 69% to 45% in a single year. They spend $3 for every $1 they earn. They’re on track to lose $14 billion this year.”
Sxrightarrow-Smith encourages users to consider alternatives, noting that other AI models offer comparable performance with zero switching costs. He points to Claude as a recommended alternative, suggesting that a collective shift in user base could significantly impact OpenAI’s business model and, by extension, its funding priorities.
He concludes by framing the situation as a choice for consumers: to continue supporting a platform whose financial and ethical implications are becoming increasingly apparent, or to explore alternatives that may better align with their values. The post, originally shared by Rutger Bregman, aims to raise awareness about the broader impact of technology subscriptions.
📝 About This Content
This article is based on insights shared by Dan Sherrard-Smith on LinkedIn.
📅 Originally posted on May 16, 2026 | View original post on LinkedIn →