The need to hate on Grokipedia is weird to me. It’s another site on the web. It’s an experiment with LLMs. Who cares?

It can be filled with a bunch of nonsense, whatever. The internet is like that. Maybe it’ll actually become something useful. Or it’ll inspire something useful.

Regardless, there’s no such thing as bad publicity, so these articles just give the project airtime. Even commenters here mention they haven’t heard of it until now.

▲

Terr_ an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> The need to hate on Grokipedia is weird to me.

Is others' negative-reaction to this sort of thing actually unusual... or is "weird" a rationalization for "seeing them do that makes me unhappy in this instance"?

I think it's relatively normal (and positive) for people to be "hating on" something which is arguably unhelpful/lies/propaganda.

	▲	jameslk 40 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah it’s pretty weird that there’s a need to write this article about it, when there’s plenty of other sites that are detestable if not more. And yet, this causes a Streisand effect. The site hasn’t been around for more than a couple of months and yet it keeps getting free airtime and backlinks from controversy of its existence. LLMs trained on the web pick up the utterances of the name all over the place and assign it some notoriety. And then, weirdly, people wonder why the site is showing up in their search/prompt results If I were an evil billionaire I guess I’d create/buy media companies just to talk negatively about myself and my projects because it’s apparently a very effective way to get attention. Just play two sides against each other who have an emotional urge to keep saying my name

▲

stingraycharles an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It’s not the fact that it exists nor is written by AIs, it’s the intent that it should promote Musk’s personal (political) biases instead of seeking out the truth.

▲

mbirth an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Do you have any evidence that Grokipedia is actually biased? Most articles are merely their Wikipedia counterpart filtered through the Grok LLM.

	▲	rtkwe 15 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Musks own tweets and words should be more than enough: Wokipedia: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1972991279706636437 Cleaning up a "mountain of woke bullshit" models are trained on: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1972991279706636437 He hasn't been subtle in the goal of this rewriting of wikipedia.
	▲	fragmede an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		The bit with mechahitler wasn't enough to convince you that the operators of the system are intentionally guiding it in a certain direction?

▲

binary132 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

unlike the eminently objective and unbiased Wikipedia

	▲	LexiMax 39 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Conservapedia already exists if you care about the politics involved. Grokipedia is just a lazy low-effort vanity project of an unlikable billionaire. And that's a sentiment I've seen from conservatives and liberals. EDIT: I think it's worth mentioning that tech oligarchs once pretended to be progressive because it was the "in" thing to do. They are now pretending to be conservative because it's the "in" thing to do. But the truth is that they have no real morals and only believe in their own wealth and power. Even if you think their politics align with yours, it is only a temporary convenience, they will discard you as sure as they discarded liberals.

▲

refurb an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

How so? Musk isn’t writing the articles, Grok is. And as far as I’ve seen, Grok doesn’t spit out information all that different from the other LLMs.

	▲	LexiMax 33 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> Musk isn’t writing the articles, Grok is. The AI is necessarily biased based on what it's trained on, and the prompt it uses. Most of the time, there is a plausible deniability at play, which is what tech oligarchs rely upon to shape your world. Thankfully in the case of Grok, we know for a material fact that it uses a biased prompt because Twitter users have tricked it into being repeated publicly.

▲

LexiMax an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The need to hate on Grokipedia is weird to me.

In isolation, Grokipedia is the vanity project of an unlikable billionare who wants to control narratives.

But I'd argue that there's more to it than just Musk. Zoom out a bit, and I think there's growing populist resentment against tech oligarchs from both sides of the aisle. People are sick and tired of the enshittification of the internet, social media, and anything with a screen. They also don't appreciate the idea of their jobs being replaced by AI when most people are already struggling to make ends meet.

So yeah, it's not just anger at the particulars of Grokipedia, people are just fed up with tech oligarchs in general. You could probably zoom out a little further and see similar resentment against of other wealthy elites for a myriad of other reaons, but suffice to say, Musk has good company among the ranks of other ghouls like Ellison, Zuckerberg, Thiel, Bezos, Andreessen and Nadella.

▲

an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

rtkwe 37 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Well Musk has said his goal is to use this edited biased version as part of the training data for Grok to "eliminate bias" in the training data because Grok keeps contradicting him. The problems isn't the page in isolation it's the project it's a part of.

▲

rexpop an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Grokipedia is a project motivated by personal grudges and political aims, rather than a neutral technical experiment. The broader context is an intensifying campaign against free and open access information by the world's richest man, ie a plutocrat.

This is going to end lives. We cannot afford a plutocracy.

▲

deeth_starr_v an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

It’s bad faith. It’s ok to deride bad faith slop