[flagged]
[flagged]
Grok 4.6
61–70 of 696 posts
Re: Grok 4.6
#62[flagged]
Re: Grok 4.6
#63As polarizing as grok is, it was basically inevitable for it to start being a real competitor given how much investment SpaceX made into its own inference capabilities. Seems if you are okay with it, there's no reason to use anything but the highest effort levels of some other frontier models for the price. I think Grok provides healthy competition to the other labs, though I do think they bank on groks reputation ma…
Curious - what is the main issue you find polarizing with grok?
[flagged]
Re: Grok 4.6
#64Anyone else find it weird how within 2 months of Fable releasing all the major labs suddenly had Fable-level models? Trying to think of explanations: 1) AI researchers talk and change companies often, so techniques circulate. This feels implausible because training and shipping a new model ought to take longer than 2 months? 2) Distillation - also implausible for the reason above. 3) Benchmark hacking. AI companies h…
> 1) AI researchers talk and change companies often, so techniques circulate. This feels implausible because training and shipping a new model ought to take longer than 2 months?
The assumed timeline (2 months) is slightly wrong because Fable (Latin) is essentially the same as Mythos (Greek) albeit with protections against cyber and biological misuse.
Mythos (Preview) was publicly announced in April 2026 [1] which means other labs have had 4 months to catch up, not 2 months.
Assuming everyone had access to Mythos from the start, your expression, similar to other folks would have been "Mythos-level intelligence" and not "Fable-level intelligence".
Re: Grok 4.6
#65Anyone else find it weird how within 2 months of Fable releasing all the major labs suddenly had Fable-level models? Trying to think of explanations: 1) AI researchers talk and change companies often, so techniques circulate. This feels implausible because training and shipping a new model ought to take longer than 2 months? 2) Distillation - also implausible for the reason above. 3) Benchmark hacking. AI companies h…
I'm solidly in the "they are benchmaxxing" camp. This became very apparent with GPT 5.6 Sol. It, too, was widely hailed to have near-Fable level intelligence. But I used it non-stop for a week and realized that they had mostly just dialed up the relentlessness meter to eleven, most likely via heavy RLHF.
Last week I gave it a small-sized auth ticket to work on, then stepped away. I came back later that afternoon and found that it had worked for 3+ hours and written 25,000+ lines of code. I skimmed over the code and it looked like a small fix followed by a massive number of additional checks around it, including static analysis tooling.
I gave it to another GPT 5.6 and said "check this code and see if it addresses the ticket". It looked at it and said that 98% of it was garbage and should be thrown away (its own words). I then gave it to Fable, which said it was massively over-engineered. Fable's theory was that the agent implemented the fix first, but then compacted and lost crucial context, forgot what the original task was about, and kept going. After many compaction cycles it was completely lost.
Some people complain that Opus 5 stops before finishing a task. But to me, that behavior is vastly preferable to what GPT 5.6 Sol does.
Re: Grok 4.6
#66It's crazy that I'd literally trust a Chinese AI company with my data over anything Musk is involved with. Like, even if you don't care about (or even like) his politics and can look past how unlikable he comes off as, the damage he's done to his own reputation in this domain just makes using his products like this a no-go. He's literally so rich that he can get caught personally looking through chat sessions and it…
[flagged]
Re: Grok 4.6
#67As polarizing as grok is, it was basically inevitable for it to start being a real competitor given how much investment SpaceX made into its own inference capabilities. Seems if you are okay with it, there's no reason to use anything but the highest effort levels of some other frontier models for the price. I think Grok provides healthy competition to the other labs, though I do think they bank on groks reputation ma…
Curious - what is the main issue you find polarizing with grok?
Not the person you are responding to, but the fact that Grok is being used to generate a ton of CSAM and pornographic deepfakes isn't great!
Re: Grok 4.6
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
4) There's nothing terribly special about Anthropic. No moat.
Agreed, but my suspicion is tied to the timing. Catching up eventually is to be expected. Having similar jumps in capability ready at the same time is odd.
Maybe "readiness" is quite a flexible category? You're mid-training for your next model; a rival releases something; you clear the boards and release the model without completing the training run?
Re: Grok 4.6
#69As polarizing as grok is, it was basically inevitable for it to start being a real competitor given how much investment SpaceX made into its own inference capabilities. Seems if you are okay with it, there's no reason to use anything but the highest effort levels of some other frontier models for the price. I think Grok provides healthy competition to the other labs, though I do think they bank on groks reputation ma…
Curious - what is the main issue you find polarizing with grok?
[flagged]
Re: Grok 4.6
#70As polarizing as grok is, it was basically inevitable for it to start being a real competitor given how much investment SpaceX made into its own inference capabilities. Seems if you are okay with it, there's no reason to use anything but the highest effort levels of some other frontier models for the price. I think Grok provides healthy competition to the other labs, though I do think they bank on groks reputation ma…
Curious - what is the main issue you find polarizing with grok?
It’s opinions are actively steered by a man who promotes the great replacement theory, white genocide, and remigration which is the mass forced deportation of non-whites.