Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

xAI's Grok 3 comes to Microsoft Azure

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 241 posts

Re: xAI's Grok 3 comes to Microsoft Azure

#31

Post by thanhhaimai »

nomel wrote: post #29
SimianSci wrote: post #24

As someone developing agents using LLMs on various platform, im very reluctant to use anything associated with xAI. Grok's training data is increasingly pulled from an increasingly toxic source. Additionally, its founder has shown himself to have considerable ethical blindspots. Ive got enough second-order effects to be wary of. I cannot risk using technology with ethical concerns surrounding it as the foundation of…

> Grok's training data is increasingly pulled from an increasingly toxic source. What's this in reference to?

It refers to this: https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/musks-xai-buys-social-...

> "xAI and X's futures are intertwined," Musk, who also heads automaker Tesla and SpaceX, wrote in a post on X: "Today, we officially take the step to combine the data, models, compute, distribution and talent."

Re: xAI's Grok 3 comes to Microsoft Azure

#32

Post by phillipcarter »

nomel wrote: post #27
phillipcarter wrote: post #17

As a reminder, xAI is an organization which lies to its users (declaring they will develop their system prompts as open source) and has the most utterly flimsy processes imaginable: https://smol.news/p/the-utter-flimsiness-of-xais-processes No serious organization using AI services through Azure should consider using their technology right now, not when a single bad actor has the ability to radically change its behav…

> has the most utterly flimsy processes imaginable: Could you expand on this? Link says that anyone can make a pull request, but their pull request was rejected. Is the issue that pull requests aren't locked? edit: omg, I misread the article. flimsy is an understatement.

The pull request was not rejected. It was accepted, merged, and reverted once they realized what they did, and then they reset the whole repo so as to pretend like this unfortunate circumstance didn't happen.

Re: xAI's Grok 3 comes to Microsoft Azure

#33

Post by [deleted] »

phillipcarter wrote: post #32
nomel wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> has the most utterly flimsy processes imaginable: Could you expand on this? Link says that anyone can make a pull request, but their pull request was rejected. Is the issue that pull requests aren't locked? edit: omg, I misread the article. flimsy is an understatement.

The pull request was not rejected. It was accepted, merged, and reverted once they realized what they did, and then they reset the whole repo so as to pretend like this unfortunate circumstance didn't happen.

[deleted]

Re: xAI's Grok 3 comes to Microsoft Azure

#34

Post by SimianSci »

nomel wrote: post #27
phillipcarter wrote: post #17

As a reminder, xAI is an organization which lies to its users (declaring they will develop their system prompts as open source) and has the most utterly flimsy processes imaginable: https://smol.news/p/the-utter-flimsiness-of-xais-processes No serious organization using AI services through Azure should consider using their technology right now, not when a single bad actor has the ability to radically change its behav…

> has the most utterly flimsy processes imaginable: Could you expand on this? Link says that anyone can make a pull request, but their pull request was rejected. Is the issue that pull requests aren't locked? edit: omg, I misread the article. flimsy is an understatement.

There is no trust built into the system. It is wholly reliant that someone from xAI publish the latest changes. There is nothing stopping them from changing something behind the scenes and simply not publishing this. All we will see are sanitized versions of the truth at best. This is a poor attempt at transparency.

Re: xAI's Grok 3 comes to Microsoft Azure

#35

Post by Remnant44 »

Analemma_ wrote: post #13
cooper_ganglia wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's honestly one of the better ones I've tried for general questions. I saw it used in a blind competition against ChatGPT, Claude, and Gemini, and amongst people who didn't use LLMs frequently, it was the most favored for 4/5 questions! It's very good at sounding much more natural and less robotic than the others, imo.

Just speaking for myself here, but my most natural-sounding conversations with people don't involve them launching into rants about white genocide in Africa regardless of conversation context, but maybe I'm setting my bar too high.

Just like talking to Grandpa!

Re: xAI's Grok 3 comes to Microsoft Azure

#36

Post by jhickok »

dockercompost wrote: post #22
mullingitover wrote: post #16

I can't think of a less trustworthy group of people on model alignment. They claimed that they had a rogue actor who deployed their 'white genocide' prompt, but that either means they have zero technical controls in their release pipeline (unforgivable at their scale) or they are lying (unforgivable given their level of responsibility). The prompt issue is a canary in the coal mine, it signals that they will absolute…

Yeah, that one incident is enough reason for me to never bother using an xai model

That is my stance as well.

Re: xAI's Grok 3 comes to Microsoft Azure

#37

Post by jampa »

Honestly, Grok's technology is not impressive at all, and I wonder why anyone would use it:

- Gemini is state-of-the-art for most tasks

- ChatGPT has the best image generation

- Claude is leading in coding solutions

- Deepseek is getting old but it is open-source

- Qwen has impressive lightweight models.

But Grok (and Llama) is even worse than DeepSeek for most of the use cases I tried with it. The only thing it has going for is money behind its infamous founders. Other than that, their existence would be barely acknowledged.

Re: xAI's Grok 3 comes to Microsoft Azure

#38

Post by ActorNightly »

nomel wrote: post #29
SimianSci wrote: post #24

As someone developing agents using LLMs on various platform, im very reluctant to use anything associated with xAI. Grok's training data is increasingly pulled from an increasingly toxic source. Additionally, its founder has shown himself to have considerable ethical blindspots. Ive got enough second-order effects to be wary of. I cannot risk using technology with ethical concerns surrounding it as the foundation of…

> Grok's training data is increasingly pulled from an increasingly toxic source. What's this in reference to?

Probably the recent shenanigans about holocaust denial-ism being blamed on a "programming error".

Re: xAI's Grok 3 comes to Microsoft Azure

#39

Post by fallingknife »

kentm wrote: post #30
SimianSci wrote: post #24

As someone developing agents using LLMs on various platform, im very reluctant to use anything associated with xAI. Grok's training data is increasingly pulled from an increasingly toxic source. Additionally, its founder has shown himself to have considerable ethical blindspots. Ive got enough second-order effects to be wary of. I cannot risk using technology with ethical concerns surrounding it as the foundation of…

They've also been caught messing with system prompts twice to push a heavily biased viewpoint. Once to censor criticism of the current US administration and again to push the South Africa white genocide theory contrary to evidence. Not that other AI providers are necessary clean in putting their finger on the scale, but the blatant manner in which they're trying to bias Grok away from an evidence-based position erode…

Has any AI company not been caught doing this? Grok is just doing it in the opposite direction. I hate it too, but let's not pretend we don't know what's going on here.

Re: xAI's Grok 3 comes to Microsoft Azure

#40

Post by fallingknife »

wormlord wrote: post #23

The desire to be "centrist" on HN is perplexing to me. The fact that Elon, a white south african, made his AI go crazy by adding some text about "white genocide", is factual and should be taken into consideration if you want to have an honest discussion about ethics in tech. Pretending like you can't evaluate the technology politically because it's "biased" is just a separate bias, one in defence of whoever controls…

Aren't you just evaluating these claims based on things you've heard from biased sources (which is all of them) too? How do you know that your biased perspective is any more correct than Grok's bias?
Post reply on HN