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

521–530 of 1001 posts

Re: Grok 4.5

#521

Post by 0xpgm »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #88

(from Cursor's blog) > Training included trillions of tokens of Cursor data which capture a wide-range of user interactions with codebases and software tools. This dataset lets the model learn both from existing software as well as developer-agent interactions, capturing how developers work and how agents interact with their environments. This is what the big money was for. Cursor is the first big player that had rea…

Generally, it seems like if you are not getting returns that outweigh your token spend, you are merely paying to train AI.

Re: Grok 4.5

#522

Post by tyre »

scarab92 wrote: post #410
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.

Give me an alternative that isn’t trying to shove left wing ideology down my throat and I’ll use that. So far, only xAI makes any attempt to be neutral in its answers.

It would be easier to understand where you're coming from if you could give some examples containing:

- prompt

- response

- why it is wrong / misleading / biased

Because there are many people online complaining about left-wing bias, then you ask what about and they're like "Trump won in 2020, vaccines cause autism, global warming is a globalist conspiracy", etc. Which is to say, it's not left-wing bias but reality bias.

Not saying you are one of those people or that there isn't bias! It's just been hard, in my personal experience, to get at it.

Re: Grok 4.5

#523

Post by rafaelmn »

jesse_dot_id wrote: post #484
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?

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.

> at least I know their motives are purely profit driven.

What profit ? They are blatantly focusing on investment narratives, politics, control, stifling competition. Profit is like a footnote at this point.

Re: Grok 4.5

#524

Post by rvz »

svachalek wrote: post #56
rvz wrote: post #33

Isn't this the same Twitter company that was supposed to go bankrupt a few years ago? Now it is somehow part of a Space company that has an AI division inside of it? I think we are going to be waiting a long time for Twitter / X to go bankrupt as it was (erroneously) predicted a long time ago.

I'd say the prediction is correct, as the acquisition is more or less just a better way to capitalize on the bankruptcy.

So did Twitter / X file for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection?

Re: Grok 4.5

#525

Post by reinitctxoffset »

apical_dendrite wrote: post #517
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?

From a business perspective, a company that trains it's LLMs to having boring, mainstream, generally-inoffensive views is a big selling point over whatever the hell Elon is doing.

Drugs. Drugs are what Elon is doing. And it's pretty cringe.

But it's remarkably similar in cringe to that little "secret erection" look Amodei gets when he talks about millions of unemployed people, or or Altman rolling through Pacific Heights in a four million dollar Swedish hypercar holding the steering wheel wrong the day after yet another lecture about UBI.

It's all pretty goddamned embarassig.

Re: Grok 4.5

#526

Post by mvkel »

awongh wrote: post #493
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?

It's interesting that all models seems to be unbiased out of the box so far- that is, mostly reflecting the training data (the internet). The whole mecha-hitler thing doesn't seem to reflect fine-tuning, it was just a prompt change. There's been some studies that suggest that certain usage of LLMs reduces political bias, which seems reasonable. Like, how credible is climate change, are Haitians eating pets, etc. THin…

> It's interesting that all models seems to be unbiased out of the box so far

This is really begging the question. If something relies on the perception of a human, it has bias. The data (or lack thereof) used to train models is per se a bias.

The mistake is assuming bias-removal is some virtuous goal to be achieved. It can't, and shouldn't. Alignment, while equally impossible, is at least a goal worth aiming towards.

Re: Grok 4.5

#527

Post by transcriptase »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #508
FunHearing3443 wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Studies on political bias in models consistently show that LLMs lean politically left. The only outlier is grok which leans right but by a smaller factor, according to this study for instance: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.23841 Edit: adding some other studies that are easily retrievable with a quick search for those unsatisfied with the first one - https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.12922 https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.16746 Claim…

I think part of the issue is that the USA is more right than most of the rest of the world. So anything trained on what the world thinks will appear left-wing to the average USA resident, and anything trained on what the USA thinks will appear right-wing to the rest of the world.

If you think the USA is more right than the rest of the world, then your concept of the rest of the world must be limited to the western half of the EU and Reddit.

Re: Grok 4.5

#528

Post by aikinai »

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...

Re: Grok 4.5

#529

Post by redox99 »

fomoz wrote: post #520
redox99 wrote: post #92

First impressions: - Very fast, easily beats GPT 5.5/Opus 4.8/GLM 5.2 because of higher t/s (around 90?) and very high token efficiency - Very good price, no contest vs GPT and Opus which are very overpriced if you pay API costs, and probably cheaper than GLM 5.2 when you take into account the token efficiency. - Will take quite a while to get a feel for how smart it is, but it's definitely good, I'd say in the same…

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.

Re: Grok 4.5

#530

Post by laurels-marts »

mapontosevenths wrote: post #378
margorczynski wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By not using them on something political? Why do I care when I'll just use it to generate code?

Because a percentage of every dollar you spend on it will go towards pushing political opinions that run contrary to your own best interests?

You seem to think you know other people’s best interests better than they do.
Post reply on HN