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

Grokipedia by xAI

grokipedia.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 169 posts

Re: Grokipedia by xAI

#41

Post by charcircuit »

measurablefunc wrote: post #39
charcircuit wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think Wikimedia doesn't profit off of the contributions people make to Wikipedia? >pays for real expenses Only a small percentage of donations do. >instead of whatever vanity project Anytime the topic of Wikimedia donations come up you will see people complaining about their vanity projects too, wishing they could donate towards wikipedia itself.

If you are happy to work for a for-profit corporation w/o any financial compensation then you are more than welcome to do that. Seems a bit irrational to me but that's just my opinion.

To me it's no worse than working for a "nonprofit" without financial compensation.

Re: Grokipedia by xAI

#43

Post by mellosouls »

I tried it briefly. Its an ok initial start with significant flaws - while it counters Wikipedia's (editorial demographic) bias on cultural topics it seems to do so by assuming the style of a bland, unanalytical reporter, accepting the self-framing of the subject and relaying it at turgid length.

An example: the classical liberal writer Douglas Murray is one of the many targets on Wikipedia of ludicrous "far right" style categorizations; nevertheless its correct to attempt to draw out his own alignments and biases especially where he writes provocatively in areas with cultural tensions.

Grokipedia seems to smooth over those tensions almost in denial while Wikipedia stirs them up via exaggeration. I don't think either are helpful or honest.

https://grokipedia.com/page/Douglas_Murray_(author)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_Murray_(author)

Re: Grokipedia by xAI

#44

Post by rsynnott »

sergiotapia wrote: post #26
cozzyd wrote: post #22

Amusing to see what Grokipedia thinks of various cities. And no surprise, apartheid apologetics: https://grokipedia.com/page/Apartheid#debunking-prevailing-n... Hilarious factual errors in https://grokipedia.com/page/Green_Line_(CTA)

You can select text, and send factual errors to be fixed. If you found something wrong in that article you should submit some fixes.

Why on earth would anyone do free work for Elon Musk, of all people?

Re: Grokipedia by xAI

#45

Post by rsynnott »

andsoitis wrote: post #29
cozzyd wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

eh that requires making an account, which I'd prefer not to.

You won’t even do that to correct the apartheid apologetics that you pointed out?

I mean, given who runs it, one would assume the apartheid apologetics are by design. I can think of few things more pointless than trying to correct Musk’s safe space.

Re: Grokipedia by xAI

#47

Post by yawboakye »

solid_fuel wrote: post #31
sergiotapia wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can select text, and send factual errors to be fixed. If you found something wrong in that article you should submit some fixes.

> If you found something wrong in that article you should submit some fixes. Why? This site isn't run by people who are interested in factual accuracy. If they think Wikipedia articles are inaccurate, they could always propose changes and have a proper discussion with the rest of the contributors. Grok was trained on Wikipedia so realistically this is just a jumbled regurgitation of Wikipedia articles blended with ot…

the pursuit of truth doesn’t work by keeping so-called falsehoods up while a debate rages on about their veracity. especially given that there’s no indication on wikipedia of contested facts. i may not be involved in the debate but i’d love some indication and perhaps a hyperlink to where the debate is happening.

the proper discussion you want will never happen. it’s an exercise in persuasion ie trying to move people from one entrenched position to another, and there’s nothing more impossible than that. the only way out is to offer competition, and that’s what grokipedia seems to be doing. check the history of christianity, heresy, reformation. when the catholic church set itself up as the object to be won over persuasively it successfully stifled doctrinal progress. until the intolerants exited.

Re: Grokipedia by xAI

#50

Post by LudwigNagasena »

cozzyd wrote: post #22

Amusing to see what Grokipedia thinks of various cities. And no surprise, apartheid apologetics: https://grokipedia.com/page/Apartheid#debunking-prevailing-n... Hilarious factual errors in https://grokipedia.com/page/Green_Line_(CTA)

By "apartheid apologetics" do you mean that it is factually wrong or merely that you dislike the framing? I think there is a huge difference between those two accusations.
Post reply on HN