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

541–550 of 1001 posts

Re: Grok 4.5

#541

Post by coffeemug »

fierycatnet wrote: post #447
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?

I've never had that issue with Grok. Latest studies I've seen put him in a very neutral zone. Left/Center/Right politics were all about the same percentages in his replies. Gemini was similar. Other two were heavily left wing leaning. When it comes to politics and world events, I find Grok to be neutral and it will push back. It helps that he is fetching it directly from X and shows references. Others just Google for…

I don’t find Opus to be overly left-leaning. I think it’s generally pretty balanced with a slight lean left, but when pressed it will happily steelman rightwing arguments and operate within a right-leaning belief framework in good faith. (I found OpenAI’s models much less willing to do that, but it’s been a while since I tried, I should retest.)

Re: Grok 4.5

#542

Post by etc-hosts »

inigyou wrote: post #139
codemog wrote: post #107

Can someone breakdown to me how this makes any sort of economical sense? Spending billions and billions to have the 3rd best model while even the number 1 and 2 players already seem to struggle making a profit. What am I missing here? Not trying to go full Ed Zitron but this doesn’t make sense to me.

Grok is the #1 uncensored easily-available model, and it's also tightly integrated with Twitter.

> tightly integrated with Twitter

Not sure that is a good thing.

Re: Grok 4.5

#543

Post by niam »

grosswait wrote: post #501
jesse_dot_id wrote: post #484

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the preferred political narrative of the model that I worry about. It's how brazen they are about altering their models to achieve it. It makes me wonder what else they're altering. I have trust issues with OpenAI and Anthropic as well, but with those companies, at least I know their motives are purely profit driven. I don't have that assurance with xAI.

Implying you prefer your manipulation to be subtle an not discussed

Arguing that "at least John is doing [clown thing] in the open" just dilutes whatever leverage John's supporters had against John on that thing.

I find myself unwanting to be on the side of people who willingly give up leverage.

Re: Grok 4.5

#544

Post by declan_roberts »

sidibe wrote: post #356
game_the0ry wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a theory that xAI has one of the largest clusters but with far less traffic + tokens to process bc its less popular than its competition, and xAI can pass the savings on to the end user.

Profitability is never a constraint for Elon companies. He has always been able to be able to extract money from the middle east, government, banks, retail investors (or these same parties through his other companies) whenever they need more. His net worth is orders of magnitude bigger than the cumulative profits his companies have ever produced (even if you only count the profitable quarters)

It's really easy to do this actually. You just create cars that drive themselves and rockets that land themselves and people start throwing money at you.

Re: Grok 4.5

#545

Post by crummy »

bigyabai wrote: post #347
ransom1538 wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

xAI's (unused) dedicated compute is being sold for Anthropic's inference. xAI isn't a frontier company, and their fate is already being decided by the two hegemons.

I am inclined to agree but grok 4.5 seems to be almost SOTA. They could be frontier soon.

Re: Grok 4.5

#546

Post by fomoz »

redox99 wrote: post #529
fomoz wrote: post #520

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what I don't understand. Why would I use this "cheaper" model when it's still going to be more expensive than Codex on the $200 plan? Are they only targeting business users who pay per token?

You can buy the Grok plan, Cursor also has a plan which includes grok 4.5, but I don't know how subsidized they are compared to codex or claude code plans.

Got it, I got confused then. Would be good to see how it compares, Codex is quite generous for the $200 with GPT 5.5. They give a lot of resets, I just use mine in Fast mode (1.5x speed, 2.5x usage) almost all the time. But it's not exactly fast.

Re: Grok 4.5

#547

Post by snek_case »

blargey wrote: post #462
blcknight wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elon's rhetoric doesn't really match the model's behavior. It is willing to criticize Elon and argues against many of the insane right way points he tries to make.

...which is why we got comically disastrous system-prompt-level attempts to "correct" this once a quarter last year (I haven't kept tabs this year, and most submissions referencing grok "incidents" get flagged off HN quickly, for better or for worse) I wouldn't trust XAI to refrain from attempting such "alignment" with proper training techniques, in ways that won't result in obvious gaffes.

Elon's public take so far has implied that he wants Grok to have better ability to reason about math and physics, thinking that this will make the model more rational (and so less biased). It's possible that they have internal RL post-training designed specifically for that. It's clear that whatever they've done hasn't made Grok align with Elon's beliefs though. Not sure if that will last or if Elon will eventually push to make the model align to his own political beliefs.

Re: Grok 4.5

#548

Post by [deleted] »

codemog wrote: post #107

Can someone breakdown to me how this makes any sort of economical sense? Spending billions and billions to have the 3rd best model while even the number 1 and 2 players already seem to struggle making a profit. What am I missing here? Not trying to go full Ed Zitron but this doesn’t make sense to me.

[deleted]

Re: Grok 4.5

#549

Post by andxor »

hajile wrote: post #435
aayushdutt wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anthropic is already profitable, economics is no longer an issue as they have found PMF in enterprise software market. You might need to update your views. https://www.wsj.com/tech/ai/mind-blowing-growth-is-about-to-...

They might be profitable for the exact two months SpaceX is giving them billions worth of free compute doesn’t seem convincing to me.

They are actually paying them $1B per month for the compute. But they're still profitable and increasingly so.

Re: Grok 4.5

#550

Post by snek_case »

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #536
NelsonMinar wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The reason it makes people uncomfortable is because people have been using it to alter images of real people, and they've done that in a public place (twitter/X), for everyone to see. So it gets in the deepfake realm, which is illegal in many places.
Post reply on HN