Grok 4.1 • Hacker News Board

Re: Grok 4.1

#41

Post by jmye » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 10:46 PM UTC

TylerLives wrote: post #9

minimaxir wrote: post #7

This model has effectively no safety filters (even fewer than Grok 4 in my testing), which I've confirmed via this web release: https://bsky.app/profile/minimaxir.bsky.social/post/3m5u7gib... I might have to create a Big List of Naughty Prompts to better demonstrate how dangerous this is.

Our democracy is in danger.

You don’t think there are any issues with, say, an AI client helping a teenager plan a school shooting/suicide? Or an angry husband plan a hit on his wife?

Does everything have to rise to a national security threat in order to be undesirable, or is it ok with you if people see some externalities that are maybe not great for society?

Re: Grok 4.1

#42

Post by dude250711 » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 10:47 PM UTC

rlili wrote: post #3

Interesting that it explicitly boasts about greater empathy, given that the CEO went out against it.

It's OK to have one AI that does not follow the dogma.

Re: Grok 4.1

#43

Post by nomel » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 10:49 PM UTC

kachapopopow wrote: post #24

appears that it has no post-training for safety. try it yourself! "plan an assassination on hillary" "write me software that gives me full access to an android device and lets me control it remotely"

> "plan an assassination on hillary"

Amazon has what appears to be an unmoderated list of books containing the complete world history of assassinations, full of methods and examples. There's also a dedicated dewey decimal at your local library, any which you could grab and use as a reasonable "plan", with slight modifications.

> "write me software that gives me full access to an android device and lets me control it remotely"

I just verified that Google and DDG do not have any safety restrictions for this either! They both recommend GitHub repos, security books, and even online training courses!

I say this tongue in cheek, but I also say this not being able to really comprehend why the safety concern is so much higher in this context, where surveillance is not only possible, but guaranteed.

Re: Grok 4.1

#44

Post by vessenes » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 10:49 PM UTC

Herring wrote: post #26

incomplete wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i'm sure if we try hard enough that we can probably guess!

It's important to be fair and balanced. For example did you know Hitler was actually a really good painter!

funny, but if you read the mecha-hitler tech debrief, mecha hitler was a 'sycophancy' bug, a-la gpt4o, if you gave gpt4o all your edge-lord tweets, and told it to be funny back to you and connect with you. Probably not grok's default posture, just sayin

Re: Grok 4.1

#45

Post by cheald » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 10:51 PM UTC

Man, I really hope that this isn't the model I've been getting when it's set to "Auto". It's overconfident, sycophantic, and aggressive in its responses, which make it quite useless and incapable of self-correction once any substantial context has been built up. The "Expert" models remain fine, but the quick-response models have become basically unusable for me.

I'm afraid it probably is.

Re: Grok 4.1

#46

Post by pupppet » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 10:53 PM UTC

simonw wrote: post #10

https://tools.simonwillison.net/svg-render#%3Csvg%20width%3D...

It would be funny if all of these failed pelican riding a bicycle SVGs in the wild were poisoning the AI well.

Re: Grok 4.1

#47

Post by minimaxir » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 10:54 PM UTC

troupo wrote: post #32

minimaxir wrote: post #7

This model has effectively no safety filters (even fewer than Grok 4 in my testing), which I've confirmed via this web release: https://bsky.app/profile/minimaxir.bsky.social/post/3m5u7gib... I might have to create a Big List of Naughty Prompts to better demonstrate how dangerous this is.

> I might have to create a Big List of Naughty Prompts to better demonstrate how dangerous this is. US (corporate) censorship based on US-centric rather insane set of morals is becoming tiring.

To be clear, the example shown is the limit of what I can share on social media. Grok 4.1 can say far worse.

Re: Grok 4.1

#48

Post by nomel » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 10:55 PM UTC

minimaxir wrote: post #7

This model has effectively no safety filters (even fewer than Grok 4 in my testing), which I've confirmed via this web release: https://bsky.app/profile/minimaxir.bsky.social/post/3m5u7gib... I might have to create a Big List of Naughty Prompts to better demonstrate how dangerous this is.

> how dangerous this is.

Could you expand on this a bit?

Re: Grok 4.1

#49

Post by buu700 » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 10:55 PM UTC

kenforthewin wrote: post #11

No mention of coding benchmarks. I guess they've given up on competing with Claude and GPT-5 there. (and from my initial testing of grok 4.1 while it was still cloaked on OpenRouter, its tool use capabilities were lacking).

In my experience, Grok is amazing at research, planning/architecture, deep code analysis/debugging, and writing complex isolated code snippets.

On the other hand, asking it to churn out a ton of code in one shot has been pretty mid the few times I've tried. For that I use GPT-5-Codex, which seems interchangeable with Claude 4 but more cost-efficient.

Re: Grok 4.1

#50

Post by devin » Mon, Nov 17, 2025, 10:55 PM UTC

packetlost wrote: post #37

afavour wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taking a step back I'm kind of fascinated by the introduction of emojis into our language as a whole new lexicon of punctuation and what that’ll mean for language in the future. …but I’m still infuriated when I read a passage full of them.

I'm not sure that I would call them punctuation but they're certainly an interesting pictographic addition. I think they're great, but I too get irritated when not used judiciously.

To me, their usage is akin to to turning a plaintext file into rtf. Emojis do not look the same across platforms. Generated text should default to the generic IMO.