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

651–660 of 1001 posts

Re: Grok 4.5

#651

Post by porridgeraisin »

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…

There is one thing to note here.

The fact that it is more token efficient will itself lead it to be smarter since the context will be smaller for the same task. However, in opus models, you'll have built internal correlations like "if it did X it will usually do Y" which may not be true here, since grok 4.5 may have done X purely due to the smaller context size, but can't do Y cos it wasn't RLd on that pattern enough. So it will be a unique experience as far as opus tier models go.

Re: Grok 4.5

#652

Post by FranzFerdiNaN »

rdbl27 wrote: post #457
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?

Has it occurred to you that _all_ model providers are actively trying to shape their models' replies to fit their preferred political narratives?

I prefer a model that is milquetoast liberal over one made by Elon 'Mechahitler' Musk.

Re: Grok 4.5

#653

Post by dijit »

G0lg0thvn wrote: post #438
dijit wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to go into it, because I agree that Elon is a very disturbing person, and there's clear evidence that Grok's harness attempts to bias towards his views. However, Grok also seems to come out consistently as the most balanced of the chat-based LLMs... So I'm not sure how to reconcile that.. maybe that's in line with "free speech absolutism", and if so, that's something I can get behind.

How does it seem to be more balanced? I haven’t seen the numbers

These articles are what makes me say that,

https://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.23841

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2026/0... (X post about it: https://x.com/genejchan/status/2070099701547090340)

https://www.promptfoo.dev/blog/grok-4-political-bias/

Re: Grok 4.5

#654

Post by Romanulus »

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?

[dead]

Re: Grok 4.5

#655

Post by realusername »

holoduke wrote: post #646
brookst wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but there’s the direction of a vector, and the length of the vector. xAI’s direction is hellish, and length is 100x any other provider’s. So, yeah, nobody is pure. But most are at least trying to be balanced and not just, you know.

Based on what do you even know the direction of xAI? Because they want to go to space? Or defence contractors? Or nazi salute? Really what is it?

> Or nazi salute

Maybe that's a clue yeah if you didn't get it otherwise...

The previous version was so lobotomised, I saw people getting anti-immigration rambling just when asking to calculate percentages...

Re: Grok 4.5

#656

Post by [deleted] »

cm2187 wrote: post #631
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.

You mean as opposed to Gemini's "subtle" woke push with diverse nazi soldiers?

[deleted]

Re: Grok 4.5

#658

Post by fmind-dev »

I'm glad we have another player remaining in the competition. More competition means lower price and more quota for us (hopefully).

Re: Grok 4.5

#659

Post by akho »

briandw wrote: post #571
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.

Gemini was giving us ethnically diverse images of Nazis. Was that profit driven or political?

That was just reality's famous liberal bias asserting itself.

Re: Grok 4.5

#660

Post by brigandish »

zactato wrote: post #325

I am amazed at people's willingness to use Grok. The company is so transparently morally bankrupt. They're the only AI company that seems okay with CSAM (or at least don't do as much to stop it) Why give them money? It would be one thing if they were the only game in town but thats definitely not the case.

Is Signal morally bankrupt for resisting the UK government's onboard scanning for CSAM?
Post reply on HN