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

Tim Bray on Grokipedia

tbray.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 243 posts

Re: Tim Bray on Grokipedia

#221

Post by whatthesmack »

ValveFan6969 wrote: post #174

On the other hand, I click on a Wikipedia article and I'm immediately bombarded with "[blank] is an alt-right neo-nazi fascist authoritarian homophobic transphobic bigoted conspiracy theory (Source: PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE HATE THIS TOPIC I BEG YOU)" At least Grokipedia tries to look like it was written with the intent to inform, not spoonfeed an opinion.

> At least Grokipedia tries to look like it was written with the intent to inform, not spoonfeed an opinion.

In addition, Grokipedia isn't encumbered by a Perennial Sources List[0] whose "generally reliable" section consists entirely of center and/or center-left media sources, and seems to be entirely purposed for gatekeeping.

The web site of the US television news network with by far the most viewership (Fox) was moved from "generally reliable" to "marginally reliable" for scientific and political claims, while MSNBC and CNN remain "generally reliable". This fact is laughable, considering MSNBC and CNN's mutual refusal to report on things like the Arctic Frost[1] (currently) and Hunter Biden laptop[2] (historically) conspiracies initiated under the Biden administration. Fox reported on both, but is not allowed as a source despite being the only major news network to not suppress the stories.

When an "encyclopedia" only allows unrestricted use of sources that fail to report information on notable news (such as conspiracies that are more far-reaching than Watergate), the encyclopedia will become less used by people because they no longer trust its new organizational and editorial biases.

Some folks, including myself, rarely reference Wikipedia anymore, because it often doesn't have the information being researched, and even if it does, we can't be sure we're getting very much (or any!) of the full story. This is broadly demonstrated by Wikipedia's constant decline in traffic from 2022 (~165M visits/day) through the present (~128M visits/day)[3].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perennial_sources_list [1] https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/new-jack-... [2] https://grokipedia.com/page/Hunter_Biden_laptop_controversy [3] https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2025-exploring-tren...

Re: Tim Bray on Grokipedia

#222

Post by 9dev »

yappen wrote: post #217
9dev wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At least most Christians and Muslims accept that others don't believe in their religion and, for the most part, don't force them to act as if they do. Just like most trans people accept that others don’t understand their way of life, and, for the most part, don’t force them to act as if they do. Yet you can’t acknowledge that and pretend all trans people are some kind of opaque mob.

[flagged]

That’s just moving the goalposts. Are you trying to say that in your opinion, trans people should be okay with that?

Re: Tim Bray on Grokipedia

#223

Post by sunaookami »

tstrimple wrote: post #218
sunaookami wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what opinion you have of me but it's completely wrong. Maybe you should get off the internet a bit.

Naw. You’re exactly the sort of credulous fool that people like Musk depend on. You have an infinite amount of excuses and justifications for outright awful behavior. “He’s working on it! He promised!” As if we should take those statements at face value given all the other mountains of evidence that we are dealing with people without morals or any real values other than enriching themselves. But sure. Keep believing…

You are fighting ghosts and your behaviour is extremely rude. I said exactly none of that, I don't even live in the US. I suggest taking a deep breath and re-reading the rules of this site: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Tim Bray on Grokipedia

#225

Post by 9dev »

yappen wrote: post #224
9dev wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s just moving the goalposts. Are you trying to say that in your opinion, trans people should be okay with that?

[flagged]

Tell me again please how someone feeling they have a different sexual identity from their biological body—and acting upon that with a medical procedure—negatively affects others? This isn't a "belief" thing, but a fundamental hurt they carry with them every single day, a profound feeling of wrongness. How on earth could it trouble you, a—supposedly—straight male, that someone doesn't want to feel that way? What do they take away from you? Why do these people need to be suppressed and drowned out as much as possible?

Re: Tim Bray on Grokipedia

#226

Post by [deleted] »

9dev wrote: post #225
yappen wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Tell me again please how someone feeling they have a different sexual identity from their biological body—and acting upon that with a medical procedure—negatively affects others? This isn't a "belief" thing, but a fundamental hurt they carry with them every single day, a profound feeling of wrongness. How on earth could it trouble you, a—supposedly—straight male, that someone doesn't want to feel that way? What do th…

[deleted]

Re: Tim Bray on Grokipedia

#227

Post by yappen »

9dev wrote: post #225
yappen wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Tell me again please how someone feeling they have a different sexual identity from their biological body—and acting upon that with a medical procedure—negatively affects others? This isn't a "belief" thing, but a fundamental hurt they carry with them every single day, a profound feeling of wrongness. How on earth could it trouble you, a—supposedly—straight male, that someone doesn't want to feel that way? What do th…

[dead]

Re: Tim Bray on Grokipedia

#228

Post by physarum_salad »

thrance wrote: post #203
physarum_salad wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact you think there are none is really hilarious!

The fact you're still eluding isn't very funny though. Please share just one, that we may discuss it.

Omission by design or by accident/lack of resources can be found in most pages on wikipedia.

Re: Tim Bray on Grokipedia

#229

Post by cowboylowrez »

lapcat wrote: post #110
meowface wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe "devil's advocate" was the wrong term for me to use. In this thread I am sharing only my honest beliefs and perspectives and was referring to the genuine initial willingness I had to show charitability to the concept of Grokipedia before its release.

> In this thread I am sharing only my honest beliefs and perspectives That's one of the reasons I object to the term. People often use "devil's advocate" to state their opinions while providing plausible deniability in the face of criticism of those opinions. Just be honest, stand behind your stated opinions, and take whatever heat comes from that honesty.

Sure sure, but what happens if someone isn't 100 percent behind their opinions? Initial assessments for instance could very well attempt to see problems or anticipate arguments for or against particular viewpoints.

Re: Tim Bray on Grokipedia

#230

Post by lapcat »

cowboylowrez wrote: post #229
lapcat wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In this thread I am sharing only my honest beliefs and perspectives That's one of the reasons I object to the term. People often use "devil's advocate" to state their opinions while providing plausible deniability in the face of criticism of those opinions. Just be honest, stand behind your stated opinions, and take whatever heat comes from that honesty.

Sure sure, but what happens if someone isn't 100 percent behind their opinions? Initial assessments for instance could very well attempt to see problems or anticipate arguments for or against particular viewpoints.

That's fine, but you should attribute your certainty or uncertainty, as the case may be, to yourself and not to "the devil."

It's vastly more honest to say, "I'm not sure about this" than "Devil's advocate: blah blah blah". Besides hiding behind the devil, the devil's advocate makes the devil look more confident than he should be.

Post reply on HN