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

Grokipedia is the antithesis of Wikipedia

404media.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 165 posts

Re: Grokipedia is the antithesis of Wikipedia

#151

Post by qcnguy »

olelele wrote: post #129
qcnguy wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Against the spirit of the contributors? You know Wikipedia's founders have heavily criticized Wikipedia's blatant political biases, right? Having LLMs edit encyclopedias, moderate forums and do everything else we rely on user moderation for today is the way of the future. They can be much fairer, more predictable, controllable and put you less at the mercy of the army of whackjobs that end up controlling sites like W…

"Can be" does a lot of heavy lifting here. LLMs have not proven their reliability anywhere afaik.

Neither have humans. On Wikipedia humans are worse than unreliable, they're deliberately trying to deceive you. But LLMs can be improved.

Re: Grokipedia is the antithesis of Wikipedia

#152

Post by cosmicgadget »

qcnguy wrote: post #106
echelon wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See all the heavily biased content on the Joe Biden and Donald Trump articles? Why not start there? Try to see if you can contribute a more neutral voice. My guess is that the tone of these articles we see now is only the beginning. This thing is only a month old. Then this will become the source of truth in the LLMs. I cannot believe they've gone so against the spirit of contributors and that there's no legal recour…

Against the spirit of the contributors? You know Wikipedia's founders have heavily criticized Wikipedia's blatant political biases, right? Having LLMs edit encyclopedias, moderate forums and do everything else we rely on user moderation for today is the way of the future. They can be much fairer, more predictable, controllable and put you less at the mercy of the army of whackjobs that end up controlling sites like W…

It is weird to call Wikipedia editors "an army of whackjobs" in the same paragraph as praising Elon for his vision in bringing hallucinated truth to the masses.

Re: Grokipedia is the antithesis of Wikipedia

#153

Post by smallmancontrov »

qcnguy wrote: post #148
smallmancontrov wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lies that Trump used to send that mob to the capital are in a different galaxy of falsehood than the BBC editing down some of his less fiery invective. It's one hell of a choice to focus on the latter over the former. Your bar for the the left is on Mt Olympus, your bar for the right is buried underneath the Mariana Trench.

If he really lied so badly they could have just broadcast those lies and held the moral high ground, but they didn't. They had to make things up (not "editing down", they spliced together sentences 50 minutes apart and hid what they did). That should be a huge reality check for you. How do you even know that any of your opinions about Trump are true? You're getting them from the kind of people who fake videos of him.…

You're clutching this complaint about editorialization like a soccer player faking an injury but facts don't care about your feelings: Trump's speech wasn't just incendiary as fuck (I've listened to it in whole), it did incite a violent mob that broke into the capitol and chanted "Hang Mike Pence! Hang Mike Pence!" as they carried a hastily constructed noose and gallows around capitol hill.

Meanwhile, there is no factual basis for Trump's claims at all:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related...

Your team had 60 chances to make factual arguments of any length using any evidence and witnesses and they failed every one of significance, even in front of Trump's DOJ and judges appointed by Trump!

What's the evidence that he wasn't just wrong but intentionally wrong? Oh, only a hundred things: we have Steve Bannon saying he planned to declare victory regardless of the outcome because there was no reason not to do it, we have the emails where John Eastman set up the fake elector plan and complained when Mike Pence wouldn't help with it, we have the fake certifications signed by the fake electors, we have the emails from Ken Chesborough setting up the signings, hell, Mike Pence went on Fox and said Trump ordered him to overturn the election results. We have Trump standing by as his mob ransacked the capitol for hours while he hoped Pence would change his mind before at long last giving up and calling them off.

The contents of that speech are one of the most documented false arguments in history and it should be a huge reality check for you that you're ignoring this to pearl clutch about something that, at worst, would have been a million times less consequential. But it won't be, because you're a partisan hack and we both know it.

Re: Grokipedia is the antithesis of Wikipedia

#154

Post by cosmicgadget »

jameslk wrote: post #39

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’…

A -pedia isn't "the internet", there are different expectations. It's like going to a .gov site and seeing political banners blaming the party not in power.

Or, as an engineer, it offends me that someone would look at a lossy compression algorithm and choose the output as their ground truth.

Re: Grokipedia is the antithesis of Wikipedia

#155

Post by cosmicgadget »

andsoitis wrote: post #42
hombre_fatal wrote: post #17

Why would anyone trust Elon Musk with anything having to do with AI? Just last week he was caught tuning Grok to say positive things about him, something Grok took so seriously that it said Elon would be the best piss drinker in the world, and it put Elon Musk in the top 3 of every human category, from philosophy to boxing to basketball. If he can’t pass up the temptation to put his foot on that scale, why would you…

> why would you trust anything generated by an LLM under his control? Why stop with him?

I didn't interpret that as being the complete list.

Re: Grokipedia is the antithesis of Wikipedia

#157

Post by cosmicgadget »

refurb wrote: post #56

I’m a big history nerd so checked out a couple historical events I know well from reading everything under the sun about them. Grokepedia is far better than Wikipedia far better for 3 of the 5 I checked. Just content wise it much richer, more descriptive. In terms of accuracy, I would say 3 of the 5 were better in Grokedpia, with 2 of them being highly one-sided in Wikipedia (presumably from people camping on the Wik…

This seems like a list you could provide.

Re: Grokipedia is the antithesis of Wikipedia

#158

Post by refurb »

smallmancontrov wrote: post #120
refurb wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have not heard of the biased prompt and since prompts are constantly refined, how do you know it's still in use? But I found this analysis interest... https://www.promptfoo.dev/blog/grok-4-political-bias/ *Our measurements show that: Grok is more right leaning than most other AIs, but it's still left of center. GPT 4.1 is the most left-leaning AI, both in its responses and in its judgement of others. Surprisingly,…

Why does political center correspond to truth? Can you not think of a dozen examples of "both sides wrong"? Of "both sides right," where a vicious fight erupts over inconsequential details? The right wing of US politics has a better organized and funded propaganda arm (show me the left-wing equivalent of Roger Ailes and now Elon Musk) so we should expect truth-seeking to land us "left of center."

> Why does political center correspond to truth?

Because it's not biased to the left or right wing?

They were testing the models political opinions. Ideally, models would be biased to neither left or right wing views.

Re: Grokipedia is the antithesis of Wikipedia

#159

Post by LexiMax »

refurb wrote: post #98
LexiMax wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I have not heard of the biased prompt and since prompts are constantly refined, how do you know it's still in use? But I found this analysis interest... https://www.promptfoo.dev/blog/grok-4-political-bias/ *Our measurements show that: Grok is more right leaning than most other AIs, but it's still left of center. GPT 4.1 is the most left-leaning AI, both in its responses and in its judgement of others. Surprisingly,…

> I have not heard of the biased prompt and since prompts are constantly refined, how do you know it's still in use?

The old adage of "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me."

We know for a fact that Grok has used biased internal prompts, the burden of proof is now on people who want to claim otherwise.

Re: Grokipedia is the antithesis of Wikipedia

#160

Post by eruci »

JeremyNT wrote: post #143
eruci wrote: post #137

The fact that certain people have such strong opinions about the recently released Grokipedia tells me the grok is actually on to something.

It's definitely onto something: continuing to spread the lies, bullshit, and propaganda intended to benefit the world's wealthiest human and the associated regime kleptocracy. Since he's unable to "buy" wikipedia and slowly poison it in the same way he poisoned Twitter, we get to see Musk build a new propaganda machine fresh, using a far less subtle hand. Will it work to further erode our shared reality and entrench…

labels aren't facts
Post reply on HN