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

Grok 4.5

x.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 1001 posts

Re: Grok 4.5

#531

Post by kccqzy »

aikinai wrote: post #528
jesse_dot_id wrote: post #291

I just don't think that I can ever trust an xAI model knowing that they are actively trying to shape its replies to fit a political narrative. How can you trust their models to be reliable in a business setting with the foreknowledge that their models are being nudged around in the backend?

Somehow you have it 100% backwards. Grok is the only one that's not trained to be extremely biased. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2026/0...

The article’s methodology is so wrong. Models have only thirty words to answer the question. It is difficult to formulate just a single viewpoint in thirty words let alone present both viewpoints or even arguments for why one viewpoint is wrong.

Re: Grok 4.5

#532

Post by Brendinooo »

cbeach wrote: post #511
jesse_dot_id wrote: post #291

I just don't think that I can ever trust an xAI model knowing that they are actively trying to shape its replies to fit a political narrative. How can you trust their models to be reliable in a business setting with the foreknowledge that their models are being nudged around in the backend?

This website tracks AI model political leanings: https://trakkr.ai/bias Grok differs from some of the other models (it's more libertarian, and more right wing), but all models have their biases - particularly ChatGPT, which sits to the economic left of 81% of US adults. See https://trakkr.ai/bias/findings

This is a neat site, honestly this reason alone is reason enough for me to be glad that Grok exists, even though I don't really use it and I have a ton of beef with libertarianism.

Just like how people complain about Airbnbs looking the same all over the world now, it's a real risk that thought itself might similarly homogenize. Unless you really trust a particular model to deliver The Truth, you should want to have many popular models that represent a variety of beliefs.

Re: Grok 4.5

#533

Post by jeremyjh »

jvanderbot wrote: post #450
solarhoma wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My immediate thought as well. Every other AI platform has very left leaning guardrails installed. Grok is the only AI platform that has been shown to be center leaning.

Replies to this thread are missing some context about the actual studies that actually looked at this. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2026/0...

Oh well if the Washington Post conducted a study then I guess that is that. Nevermind that the AI labs can't replicate those results and neither can I.

Did you try running any of those prompts yourself? I do not get the biased answers they reported, running them in an incognito window.

Re: Grok 4.5

#534

Post by jeremyjh »

aikinai wrote: post #528
jesse_dot_id wrote: post #291

I just don't think that I can ever trust an xAI model knowing that they are actively trying to shape its replies to fit a political narrative. How can you trust their models to be reliable in a business setting with the foreknowledge that their models are being nudged around in the backend?

Somehow you have it 100% backwards. Grok is the only one that's not trained to be extremely biased. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2026/0...

The AI labs claim they couldn't replicate those results and neither can I. I don't get the biased responses using the same prompts in an incognito window.

The Washington Post is about as trustworthy as Fox News.

Re: Grok 4.5

#535

Post by drob518 »

squidbeak wrote: post #140
xnx wrote: post #75

With each release from the the other major labs, it becomes harder for Google to tell a compelling story about Gemini 3.5. Edit: Gemini 3.5 Pro . Expectations grow with each day it is not released.

Gemini 3.5 Pro hasn't been released yet.

I think that’s part of the commenter’s point.

Re: Grok 4.5

#536

Post by tick_tock_tick »

NelsonMinar wrote: post #399
zactato wrote: post #325

I am amazed at people's willingness to use Grok. The company is so transparently morally bankrupt. They're the only AI company that seems okay with CSAM (or at least don't do as much to stop it) Why give them money? It would be one thing if they were the only game in town but thats definitely not the case.

People give them money because of the moral stance. They are either actively fine with the CSAM or just don't care.

Or realistically people don't view it as CSAM just like how drawing a really realistic image isn't. I don't think it's "good" but it's not CSAM.

Re: Grok 4.5

#537

Post by altcognito »

MithrilTuxedo wrote: post #518
rdbl27 wrote: post #457

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has it occurred to you that _all_ model providers are actively trying to shape their models' replies to fit their preferred political narratives?

That's the claim, and it's a belief that's self-fulfilling prophecy, like saying all politicians are corrupt. If you can convince everyone that everyone is corrupt, it hurts anyone who isn't corrupt. You hear people preferring those who have no shame about their corruption, based on the premise that those who aren't overtly corrupt must be more sinister and dangerous if they hide their corruption so well. It's a race…

Such a good point. Disinformation and trying to destroy sources of truth is just part of the puzzle. Often the worst damage is just "well, both sides are bad" -- because it just tells people not to listen to either side, or it is too much work.

The end goal: they want to push that you must sacrifice your rights to a monarch or authoritarian person for order and safety.

Re: Grok 4.5

#538

Post by replwoacause »

zactato wrote: post #325

I am amazed at people's willingness to use Grok. The company is so transparently morally bankrupt. They're the only AI company that seems okay with CSAM (or at least don't do as much to stop it) Why give them money? It would be one thing if they were the only game in town but thats definitely not the case.

[flagged]

Re: Grok 4.5

#539

Post by [deleted] »

vlian2088 wrote: post #135
xnx wrote: post #75

With each release from the the other major labs, it becomes harder for Google to tell a compelling story about Gemini 3.5. Edit: Gemini 3.5 Pro . Expectations grow with each day it is not released.

for what it's worth, it's fairly popular among my non-technical coworkers here in Russia. we have unlimited access to all models so it's not about the cost, and they still prefer Gemini over Claude and GPT. I never bothered to ask why, but I assume it's better at communicating in Russian.

[deleted]

Re: Grok 4.5

#540

Post by tick_tock_tick »

cousinbryce wrote: post #479
bashtoni wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But very expensive compared to Deepseek v4 Pro, which performs similarly. Grok is stuck in a difficult place - not the best model at anything, and not the cheapest either. It's hard to make a case for using it on any dimension, even before you factor in the history (I'm not sure suggesting the company uses the model that refers to itself as "MechaHitler" is the way to a promotion).

It’s the #1 model for creating CSAM

An AI model can't create CSAM unless you're claiming it's managing to hire people to commit crimes in the real world?
Post reply on HN