201–210 of 730 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
You live under the wrong impression that ad hominem is always bad. Ad hominem is allowed under certain circumstances, just remember Epstein. Would you have bought anything from him and dismissed any critique of that as ad hominem?
This is not the right thing, this is the tactical thing. If you have an LLM with less than 1% of the share to begin with, you suffer from bad rep and you got caught uploading user data, one of the very few remaining tactical moves to try to climb out of it is this.
Another tactical move is to just stop. You're allowed to exit the AI business. Nobody's forcing you to keep throwing money into the furnace. Just be a rocket company. All of the xAI founders left. Your product's brand name is mud. Just stop doing that and build spaceships.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is an insane amount of code for something like this!
to be fair, coding agent harnesses have been becoming more and more complex. it's not an llm in a loop with tools anymore (as claude code was rumoured to be on HN).
This is an incredible amount of code for what it offers. I don't think this was intentionally designed at all.
Sigh, why has the industry converged on TUI? Branding and aesthetics over functionality? TUI is just much worse for me. I tried Codex CLI vs Codex UI and Codex UI beats it at every level.
It's a shame that they exfiled private data. The model is actually good (better than opus 4.8 imo) and the harness itself is butter smooth with the potential of being the best out there.
It definitely doesn't feel like opus. I constantly switch to opus to fix up or finish what grok generates, it feels like sonnet 3!
Source : https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/capabilities/coding
Why bother with this when they already paid $60B for Cursor?
XAI wants people to use it's own model.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The many controversies are not hard to find as the children to your comment will show. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/22/technology/grok-x-ai-elon...
Why is that even a problem? If no images are released on the internet (and users consume them privately), no one is harmed in the process. Blocking AI from generating sexualized images because people could publish deepfakes is no different than banning alcohol because of drunk driving. Tools are neutral. Blame the people who misuse the tools and hurt others.
Yikes.
A. They were released all over the internet - from the article..
> The chatbot has a public account on X, where users can ask it questions or request alterations to images. Users flocked to the social media site, in many cases asking Grok to remove clothing in images of women and children, after which the bot publicly posted the A.I.-generated images.
B. There is a bunch of data about consumers of CSAM 'content escalating' and eventually attempting to make real contact with minors.
C. They were sexualizing pictures of real people and posting the pictures online.
> One of the young plaintiffs said she found out about the imagery after she received an anonymous message on Instagram pointing her toward images and videos, including her high school yearbook photo, which had been altered to show her in sexually explicit actions and full nudity.
The material was being shared on a Discord server, a private chat space on that platform, and included similar imagery that had also been altered using Grok of at least 18 other women who were minors, according to the complaint.
> Tools are neutral.
Ha.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Another tactical move is to just stop. You're allowed to exit the AI business. Nobody's forcing you to keep throwing money into the furnace. Just be a rocket company. All of the xAI founders left. Your product's brand name is mud. Just stop doing that and build spaceships.
> You're allowed to exit the AI business. Isn’t it more fun to fight the incumbents, the behemoths, the goliaths?