Saying “Please” and “Thank You” to ChatGPT Wastes Electricity? OpenAI Boss Sam Altman’s Surprising Claim—What Do You Think?

Do you use polite phrases when talking to AI? OpenAI CEO Sam Altman recently said that telling ChatGPT “please” and “thank you” actually wastes computing resources and electricity. The remark sparked heated debate: how should we view our interactions with AI? Which matters more—efficiency or courtesy?

Do you have a habit of saying “please” and “thank you” to ChatGPT or other AI chat-bots? For many people it’s no big deal—just basic online etiquette. After all, we were taught to be polite, right?

But listen to Sam Altman—the “father of ChatGPT” and head of OpenAI. He just dropped a controversial viewpoint: using those pleasantries with AI is simply “wasting resources.”

The internet exploded. What? We can’t even say thanks anymore? What’s going on?

Is Courtesy Wrong? Altman’s “Efficiency-First” Argument

Altman’s logic is direct—some might say “engineer-brained.” AI isn’t human, has no feelings, and won’t be happier or more willing to help because you said “please” or “thank you.”

From a technical angle, when you type “Please tell me the weather,” the AI still has to parse the words “please tell me.” For a single request that overhead is tiny—but scale it to the hundreds of millions of prompts sent worldwide each day.

Every extra “please,” “thanks,” or “could you” forces the system to:

Identify those courtesy terms.
Interpret their (usually unnecessary) function in the sentence.
Generate a potentially longer, more “polite” response.

All of that consumes precious compute and electricity. Altman argues that as AI usage explodes, these tiny inefficiencies add up and could even burden the environment.

To him, showing courtesy to a machine with no consciousness is pointless—a cultural nicety that becomes unnecessary “system load.”

The Hidden Cost: An Energy Bill for Polite Words

Wait—can a few extra words to AI really burn that much energy? Sounds exaggerated.

While no study measures the exact “energy cost of AI politeness,” related data offer clues. A joint study by the University of California and The Washington Post estimated that sending a 100-word email uses about 0.14 kWh of electricity. That powers 14 LED bulbs for an hour, or nine D.C. households for one hour over a year’s worth of email traffic.

AI conversations are far more compute-intensive. Large language models like ChatGPT run on energy-hungry data centers. Every interaction, however small, triggers server computations.

Altman’s point: one polite exchange adds minuscule power draw, but at global scale—millions of such prompts daily—those “unnecessary” words collectively raise energy use.

He hints that surplus politeness is not just cultural habit; it’s an environmental burden.

What Does the AI Itself Say? A Cold Technical View

Ask ChatGPT directly and the reply is pure tech:

“I have no emotions or consciousness, so ‘please’ or ‘thank you’ doesn’t affect my operation. ‘Please turn on the radio’ and ‘Turn on the radio’ are functionally identical commands.”

Indeed, courtesy is redundant to AI.

Interestingly, ChatGPT also acknowledges “the human factor.” Many users keep polite language out of habit, especially as AI enters education, healthcare, and personal life. Humanizing the interaction makes cold tech feel warmer and users more comfortable.

How Should We Treat AI—Tool or Partner?

Altman’s comments push us to rethink AI interactions.

He promotes a utilitarian view: treat AI as a high-efficiency tool, not a dialogue partner needing tender care. From that stance, trimming superfluous polite words boosts efficiency and—by lowering energy waste—helps the planet.

Does that mean future AI chats must be blunt? Maybe not. But Altman highlights a trend: as AI proliferates, we need a culture of cost-effective, environmentally responsible use.

Balancing human-friendly interaction with technical efficiency and environmental impact will be a key challenge in AI’s future.

Efficiency vs. Warmth—AI’s Modern Dilemma

Ultimately this reflects a cultural adjustment in the AI era.

On one hand, we apply human etiquette to AI, making tech interactions feel less sterile.

On the other, AI is a tool seeking speed and accuracy. Excess “human warmth” may truly be redundant resource use.

There’s likely no absolute right or wrong—like chatting to pets or plants, saying “please” and “thanks” to AI may satisfy our own emotional needs.

Yet Altman’s reminder matters: when deploying new tech at scale, we must weigh its resource footprint.

So—after hearing Altman, will you still say “please” and “thank you” to ChatGPT? It’s food for thought.

FAQ

Q1: Why does OpenAI CEO Sam Altman say courtesy to ChatGPT is wasteful?
A: Altman argues AI lacks feelings; polite words (“please,” “thanks”) don’t help it perform. Parsing those extra words consumes compute and electricity. Given massive global usage, that cumulative waste could impact the environment.

Q2: Does ChatGPT “care” whether users are polite?
A: Technically, no. ChatGPT states it has no emotions and processes “Please turn on the light” the same as “Turn on the light.” It also notes users may prefer politeness for habit or natural flow.

Q3: Can politeness toward AI really harm the environment?
A: Each interaction’s added energy is tiny, but Altman highlights scale effects. Millions of daily AI prompts mean even small overheads grow large, especially since AI data centers already consume vast power.

Q4: How should we talk to AI—just be direct?
A: There’s no standard answer. Altman favors efficiency, but many feel comfortable using polite words. It’s a personal choice once you understand the efficiency and resource trade-offs.

Q5: Does this mean future AI interactions will feel cold?
A: Not necessarily. Altman speaks from efficiency and environmental views. We can still have friendly or playful AI chats—so long as we’re aware of the underlying costs and aim for balance.