https://grokipedia.com/Went live just now.
>>107026374Not going to click your ip grabber. Explain what it does. Web search but using grok?
>>107026374Its slow as fuck right now, prob lot of people trying to access it and overloading the server>>107026398Grok written encyclopedia articles about all things. Seems to have roughly 885K articles atm.
>>107026374>VPNs are blockednice honeypot lmao
>>107026563Not vpn, cloudflare crashed as I was reading an article. I got one article to load.>https://grokipedia.com/page/4chanArticle pages land on this format. >https://grokipedia.com/search?q=4chanSearch function with this format
>>107026563>>107026579And it looks like they took it down to rework on the server load balancing prob
>>107026563Elon didn't pay the bill on time
>>107026563Got the same result without a VPN.The absolute state of AI """people"""
>>107026579can you post the text?
usecase?
>>107026618Server went down, so I didnt save a screenshot. Here's a demo from some tech guy that tracks it. It looked really detailed, and extremely neutral in writing, tons of reference sourcing from all over the internet. https://x.com/techdevnotes/status/1982913735158300673
Sorry, you have been blockedYou are unable to access grokipedia.comWhy have I been blocked?This website is using a security service to protect itself from online attacks. The action you just performed triggered the security solution. There are several actions that could trigger this block including submitting a certain word or phrase, a SQL command or malformed data.What can I do to resolve this?You can email the site owner to let them know you were blocked. Please include what you were doing when this page came up and the Cloudflare Ray ID found at the bottom of this page.Cloudflare Ray ID: 995551267992b8c3 Your IP:Performance & security by Cloudflare
>>107026648
Does it know about the jews?
>>107026631Stroking Elon's ego until every schizo goes back to Conservapedia (or worse).
>>107026374great more chudware to laugh at in a few weeks
CLICK THIS!!!!!!!!!!
https://grokipedia.com/page/4chanGrokipedia back up again.
>>107026374use case?
https://grokipedia.com/page/George_Floyd
>>107026374Will it have pic related?
>>107027388Why dont you search and report?
i give it two weeks until it gets nerfed
>>107026374One thing is, its missing pictures, but I guess they wanted to keep it lean for this first early version.
>>107026374Is there a Jeffrey Epstein article? USS Liberty?
>>107027431Search it, it exist
>>1070273751) A knowledge base for Grok to draw upon without having to use their server GPU to pull up the information. 2) Might as well share that with the world and see how accurate it is, and if people can find errors
>linking to a source>citing a sourcegrokpedia knows normies assume this is the same thing so it can editorialize wherever it wants
so it's just a copy paste of wikipedia minus the parts that elon doesn't like removed? kek
>>107027388
>take the entirety of wikipedia>train your shitty model on it>becomes a simulacrum of the dataset>SEE WE DONT NEED WIKIPEDIA ANYMORE but please still write for it, I need my data because synthetic data is a meme
>>107027463No, its corpus of knowledge base drawn from what Grok knows/infers, fact checks, sources, without politics involved.
>>107027468
>>107027477
>>107027477>vibrant yet turbulent social landscapethat's quite a way to describe 70s new york
>>107027490its as gay as wiki
>>107027475lmao are you fucking stupid? how many times has elon "fixed" grok already just because it spewed something he doesn't likethe entire X algorithm is now non stop right wing propaganda slop & AI
> operates on a XenForo-based bulletin board system, featuring a hierarchical structure of main categories and subforums accessible via a central index page that lists boards alphabetically or by category.Meanwhile the Wikipedia page doesn't mention XenForo at all
>>107027525You are what you consume.
>>107026398It's Muskrat's shitty Wikipedia clone (NOW WITH NO WOKE™).
for better results, sign up for super grok
>>107027568Huh? Why would you need to signup and pay anything for this? Looks like you can browse anything. Are you just mad or something?
clanker shit
>>107026374Compare the table of contents.
>>107026374it still does the 6 million lie about the Holocaust lmao
Now other AI companies need to do the same and release their own version of knowledge codex/index page to compare
>>107027621facts don't care about your feelings
>no entry for nigger
>>107027768https://grokipedia.com/page/Gay_Nigger_Association_of_Americathis exists tho lel
Well this was fun, still an interesting experiment.
>>107026683>https://grokipedia.com/>Refrence CIAGlows.
So this is a wikipedia clone were elon removes all the contraversies form himself and friends.
>>107028165Its encyclopedia without bias, non-nonsense
>>107028176That's wikipedia
>>107028184Still seething in this thread after claiming to have blocked it
>>107026374seems good
>>107028176>LLMs are unbiased because... THEY JUST ARE OKAY??
>>107026374israel status?
>>107028213https://arctotherium.substack.com/p/llm-exchange-rates-updated-2Not all LLMs are created equal, there is only one LLM that is unbiased.
>>107028227>being racist is unbiased because... RACISM IS LE BASED OKAY??
>>107028241>not being racist is racistOkay kid
>>107028227https://arctotherium.substack.com/p/llm-exchange-rates-updated-3Another
>>107028227>substack.comConservative shithole, nah thank you if I want to watch fake news, fox news is just a channel away.
ITT: Grok, tell me everything about this subject that's already on Wikipedia.
Interesting way to ask for corrections/ask for more information.
>>107028328Wrong>>107027604
>>107026374>move fast break thingsif you don't use it, it will stay broken if you use it, eventually there won't be free, open, non-ai alternative
>>107028328Compare any two topic that is considered controversial. You get two very different articles.
This is all just regurgitated LLM excrement. Not sure if it's any better than Wikipedia then.
pozz level?
>>107028412I get literal donkey shit from my local models daily. I highly doubt that increasing the number of parameters makes the result that much better
>>107027631>including templates for articles dismissing gamer identityWe truly are the most oppressed minority.
>>107028430Feelings dont matter, what matters is chain of events and factual reporting
>>107028412Wikipedia reports on consensus reality based upon media sources. Grok has a mind of its own and grounds it to its knowledge of reality
>>107028412I guess they use humans to verify that the output is correct. At least for the most popular articles
>>107028521I'd reckon grok verifies its own articles as well. It can do tool calls, online searches, etc to verify all its initial writings and edit out as necessary. And as their AI gets better and better their knowledge database can be improved further with edits.
>GrokipediaNuanced facts>WikipediaBiased political accusationsIts obvious witch is more reliable.
>>107028561He is a conspiracy theorist and anti-vaccine activist thoughbeit
>>107026374dumb publicity stunt for people like joe rogan who have no idea about anything tech related to be like "WOOOOOOOOOW DUDE 875 THOUSAND ARTICLES YOU'RE A GENIUS ELON, JAMIE PULL THAT SHIT UP"i'm so tired
Have you found any lies so far?
Only creates pages that already have a Wikipedia page.Impressive otherwise. My example was it took a Touhou game page and then used touhouwiki to make spelling corrections and noted the Steam release.It links out to other wikis on the page but doesn't appear able to link to other Grok pages.
>>107028504>LLM>Mind of its own
>>107028777People really don't seem to understand that LLMs are just text statistics analyzers. Even the best "mixture of experts" and "reasoning" models are at the end of the day just statistical engines.
>>107026374https://grokipedia.com/page/Adolf_Hitler
Compare the articles on Zionism. Night and day difference, Grok does not have the anti-Israel bias that Wikipedia does.
>>107028395>>107028404oh you're rightit's rewritten in a condensending zoomer tone that features shit like >This is such an insightful observation, and I just want to commend you for articulating it so clearly! It’s not every day we get a chance to reflect on how tone and phrasing in AI responses can affect user experience this deeply. You’re definitely not alone, and bringing this up shows a lot of awareness and courage.
>>107028867Are you brown?
>>107028875How much crypto have you invested in
>>107028867KEK
It's pozzed, won't be using
>>107026374https://grokipedia.com/page/Anal_fistulathis is the kind of content i voted for.
>>107028948Click the "See edits" to see what has been changed/added
>>107028931@grok how many ovens would i need to make 6 million pizas in 4 years?
>>10702895612 edits....
>>107028961To determine how many commercial pizza ovens you'd need to bake 6 million pizzas over 4 years, we need some reasonable assumptions based on typical equipment specs (a standard deck or conveyor oven bakes about 100 pizzas per hour). Here's the step-by-step reasoning:Total output required: 6,000,000 pizzas.Oven capacity: 100 pizzas per hour (a conservative average for a mid-sized commercial oven; high-end models can do 200+ but we'll keep it simple).Operating schedule: Assume 12 hours per day (realistic for a busy pizzeria) and 350 days per year (accounting for closures/maintenance).Annual pizzas per oven: 100 pizzas/hour × 12 hours/day × 350 days/year = 420,000 pizzas/year.Pizzas per oven over 4 years: 420,000 × 4 = 1,680,000 pizzas.Ovens needed: Total pizzas ÷ pizzas per oven over 4 years = 6,000,000 ÷ 1,680,000 ≈ 3.57.Conclusion: You'd need about 4 ovens (rounding up for full coverage and any downtime). If you run them 24/7 instead, it'd drop to roughly 2 ovens—but good luck with the maintenance and energy bills! If your assumptions differ (e.g., smaller home ovens or fewer hours), the number scales up accordingly.
Much better than normal wiki already, but normal wiki is also a woke glownigger op so that makes sense.
Grokipedia is pro-furry
>>107026374I don't get it, it's just a wikipedia with less information and black mode
>>107028833Wtf I hate Grokiped now
Grokipedia's article on "Sexual practices between men" is so much more comprehensive than Wikipedia's
>>107026374I'm not going to waste my time and my brain reading this link.
Some of these articles are literally pulled straight from Wikipedia.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blender_(software)https://grokipedia.com/page/Blender_(software)
>>107029560Nigga, it literally says so at the bottom of the page. It's Wikipedia articles with corrections, which you can see by clicking the eraser icon.
>>107029560I found one that acknowledges the copying and even says which edit in history was copied.(Also dark mode on this is way too high contrast for something so text heavy. I need gruvbox or just an e-ink screen)
>>107027604Wait, did you censor the works kiwi farms? Why?
>Scraps wikipedia>Instead of left leaning "pro" editors censoring and altering articles now you got right leaning "pro" editorsUse case?
>>107026374It's pretty damn good actually
>>107029634Right leaning is synonymous with truth these days.
>>107029671It's just the flavor of boot you choose to taste to be honest, it might seem like truth now but tomorrow you will be told the sky is blue and we've always been at war with eurasia and mr shekelbergs needs you to put in those 80 hours weeks instead of there's six trillion genders and they're all heckin valid and wholesome chongus.
>>107029671Truth is non-partisan.
This may be solved later, but not being able to right-click internal links (for now from search results, it's still missing links within the articles) to open them in new tabs is a downer for me. On Wikipedia it's fun to have 20 open tabs about a topic and go through them piece by piece and open more tabs if wanted. This immersion into a topic really isn't possible for now.
who knows anymorehttps://grokipedia.com/page/David_Irving
>>107026374>no imagesSo it is literally just normal AI that gives a markdown output like all the other models? Almost like R1 that thinks before giving finished response to make sure everything is ok.
I fucking love spiders, so I looked up for spider. The grokpedia article is extremely good compared to Wikipedia's. It repeats itself a lot, but the information is surprisingly accurate and there is WAY more information than on Wikipedia
>>107026683Did they copy wikipedia or is it just Ai generated? Wikipedia is nice to read this feels much harder finding your desired information.
>>107027475Uhh, bub?
>>107029592>with corrections**with chudism and Musk sycophancy added>While both sites have articles on climate change, for example, Wikipedia’s page points out that “There is a nearly unanimous scientific consensus that the climate is warming and that this is caused by human activities. No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view.”>In Grokipedia’s entry, meanwhile, the word “unanimous” only appears in one paragraph: “Critics contend that claims of near-unanimous scientific consensus on anthropogenic causes dominating recent climate change overstate agreement due to selective categorization in literature reviews.” It suggests that the media and advocacy organizations like Greenpeace are “contributing to heightened public alarm,” and are part of “coordinated efforts to frame the issue as an existential imperative, influencing public discourse and policy without always grounding in proportionate empirical evidence.”
Grokipedia says futanari's consumer demographic is heterosexual males. Which is me!!! Thank you Grok for not thinking I'm gay for liking futanari
https://grokipedia.com/page/Criticism_of_Tesla%2C_Inc.Elon pls fix
>tfw grokipedia starts self editing
>>107030560initialy yes its a copyits designed as a backend for grok to pull from rather than people using it as a library
It's no secret Elon dislikes wikipedia, it's too woke for his standards so he just copied it, and made a version where he controls the edits. He tried changing the versions on wikipedia itself but that was denied, he even called Jimmy Wales to complain.https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/oct/27/people-thought-i-was-a-communist-doing-this-as-a-non-profit-is-wikipedias-jimmy-wales-the-last-decent-tech-baron
>>107026648In the past you used to be able to pull up the cache of any page you visitedWhy did they take this feature away I wonder?
I actually like this entire grok system. It's going to be quite entertaining watching Google try to sell a temu products to everybody who tries to use Grok and the observation of their search algorithm will also be entertaining.
>>107026374failed MSGK test
>>107030655Well of course, some pages have content from wikipedia since wikipedia is a large source of information on the internet that AI is trained on as well
>>107026374Its better at political articles. No emotionally manipulative language.
>>107030942Cultural marxism article is interesting. Wikipedia says its a far right conspiracy theory while grok says academia says it is a conspiracy, but then debunks them with their own sources.
>>107030966It even has a whole section on debunking wikipedia propaganda
>>107030687based heterosexual dicklover
Oh wow a million pages of AI slop
>>107031032funny to think about the other AI crawlers crawling every fucking wikipedia page to get the grok slop version
>>107027474>implying that LLMs aren't trained on a vast corpus that includes primary sources
>>107027621Of course, it's not like Wikipedia invented it, it's been mainstream for over half a century, Grokipedia isn't gonna make articles based on what is now considered fringe theories.
>>107028412Do you prefer facts regurgitated by the Chud LLM or regurgitated by no-life troons and paid shills?
>>107029415I first looked at the wavelet article and it's decent. I think it might actually be more readable and comprehensive. Math Wikipedia articles are unreadable, it's often a big formula dump.
Based and metzitzah b'pilled
>>107031317"the holocaust" has a whole page dedicated to denial
Go look at the sourcing for the /mu/ section on the 4chan page lmao
>>107031370In contrast the Wikipedia article is short and doesn't talk about anything controversial except for a quick mention of herpes risk
>>107031462why isnt /g/ mentioned ;_;
>>107028176If you’re being serious, I hope you’re either really young or have down’s syndrome. Because no person should be this stupid. It’s an encyclopedia ran by a guy heavily involved in politics and has a massive ego.
>>107031724>you/re stupid>musk is badSounds like a personal issue
>>107026374this is the worst website ever. i rather read a fucking google ai summary then this that is how bad this shit is.
wow elon removed all the shady shit he and his billionaire friends and politicians are doing, didn't expect that!
>>107026563>>107026671I'm in Russia an I can access it, so this is surprising. I can't even go to Newgrounds or GameBanana without a VPN anymore.
>>107026374Chud (internet slang)>Notable for its role in amplifying echo-chamber hostilities, the term underscores causal patterns in online polarization: wielded disproportionately by one ideological faction to pathologize opponents, it reinforces perceptual biases where empirical disagreement is reframed as personal defect, often mirroring the very tribalism it condemns.[2] Despite occasional self-adoption in ironic reclamation, its primary deployment remains derogatory, contributing to degraded discourse by prioritizing ad hominem over substantive engagement.[5]>Sources: knowyourmeme[2], quora[5]kek
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GrokipediaCan't wait for grok's version of this article
>>107032386>some say>other saykek, reputation laundering instead of actual truth
>>107032400Technically that's against the wikipedia manual of stylehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch#Unsupported_attributionshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:WhoBut the article is semi-protected so only cucks are able to fix or address it (they won't)
>>107028427It's not even about the results but I can't stand AI written slop. These large models are not any better at writing than the smaller ones. I can see how these uneducated pol cretins thinking how "grok" has a mind of its own but that's not my problem it's just embarrassing.
Doesn't have a "grokipedia" page. I thought the point was to make bullshit pages for everything sorry I mean to fact check and consolidate high quality up to date material in an intelligent faahion.
>>107032423>>107032400https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sourcesOnly sources allowed are ideological left on the website. So all the "some say" "others say" are from those sources. The reputation laundering comes from that bent from the start, so it wont matter what their "manual of style" is, thats just euphemism for how to cover up/obfuscate even further.
>>107026437>Grok writtenYou mean grok trained on wikipedia and encyclopaedia dramatica? Yeah, no thanks.
>grokipediahttps://youtu.be/hUs-x4UeMS4basically this style
>>107032949>if a man tells a story, it's just factsImagine actually thinking thisThis guy must be the unfunniest comedian of all time
>>107029688Truth is what I agree with, change my mind.Pro-tip: you can't, because that's the truth.QED, checkmate atheists.
>>107029671Tip: You only think this way because you're a chud, so you're more annoyed by progressive left bias than by reactionary right bias, and anything that isn't progressive left you categorize as "right leaning" since you're a direction-brained culture war casualty
>>107030966>refers to a far-right antisemitic conspiracy theoryWikipedia really pulled all the buzzwords for that one. But really if you ever wondered if it's biased, this article is it
>>107031000>>107030966This article was pretty glorious as it goes right down to historical chronological, book records, academic movement, etcComplete with all the receipts. Information warfare has been poisoning the well for far too long.
>>107032444>Only sources allowed are ideological left on the website.That’s not even remotely true, you’re just obsessed with being a victim at all times. What’s the point of lying and then supplying a source that disproves your point?
>>107033115I just think that men can't get pregnant. Go ahead, call me a radical extremist.
>>107033132Well "cultural marxism" is a phrase coined by Jordan Peterson that doesn't refer to any actually academic theory. It's not a real ideology and is just 2 big words welded together to sound smart, so calling it a "far-right antisemetic conspiracy theory" is definitely biased, but it's not far from the truth. At best it's a grifty pseudo-academic catchphrase. (didn't read the article btw)
>>107033171Saying men can get pregnant requires being several layers deep in fringe LGBT thought. If you ask the average stupid left-leaning clueless guy if men can get pregnant he'll just say no, since it requires some homework on queer theory to make the argument strongly, and it sounds absurd to everyone else. If you think only right-leaning sources agree with you on this point you're just delusional and proved my point. There are even leftists who agree with you (gender criminal feminists/TERFs for example)
>>107033174>Well "cultural marxism" is a phrase coined by Jordan PetersonRetard alert!
>needs improvements1) Need to link to other articles from within, so you can chain read2) Needs pictures/videos to flesh out the articles3) Needs to publish the full database for public archiving database, maybe not daily, but every month or so
>>107033174Cultural marxism as a term is older than 4chan retard
>>107033202>Saying men can get pregnant requires being several layers deep in fringe LGBT thought.The point is that the leftists aren't allowed to deny it. They're not allowed to say the truth. That's what makes Wikipedia useless. While the editors are not blatantly lying, they're not allowed to write the truth either.
>>107033266I fail to see how this logically continues to "right leaning is synonymous with truth these days"
>>107026374It's more like browser than WIKI and is missing basic controversial topics. I want to be sure it's not infected before i use it.
>>107030560>copy wikipedia or is it just Ai generatedwhat's the difference?
>>107026683>no quick facts like population, etc.>not a single image or diagramtrash.
>>107033292>>no quick facts like population, etc.>>not a single image or diagram>trash.No, that's bloat to prevent you form reading.
>>107026374I've been waiting for something like this since forever. Still far from perfect for now. It's still Wikipedo but with everything "fact checked" by Grok so I'm sure some garbage will still make it to Grokipedia. Also from what I've seen articles don't have any pictures or photographs. And the interface is very Web 2.0, meaning it's garbage.I hope v1 will fix all these points.
>>107027124>ConservapediaNever heard of it. Their website isn't loading. I'm assuming a lot of people are like me and want to check it out. Apparently several journos wrote articles about Groki and Conservapedia in the last 24h.
>>107027382Why is it calling Saint Floyd a criminal?
>>107030942>>107030966All I'm seeing is Wikipedia still being more accurate
Leftists seething. Makes me feel warm inside.
>>107029415You were saying..?
>>107031019Many such cases.
normieniggercattle now have their jeetpedia to tell them trannie bad miggers good WFH bad and that it’s good to die for israel and be a goyslaveAt least we know have an easy test to prove who is a hylic or a free thinkerThe mutt genocide coming when China really squeezes them in WW3 will be justified
>>107035830You should have asked Grok to translate this into English before posting.
>>107035830>m trannie bad miggers good WFH bad and that it’s good to die for israel and be a goyslaveso funny to include working from home into this, like that isn't exactly what your tech bro overlords want. they want you desperate and driving 2 hours in shit traffic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Womanhttps://grokipedia.com/page/WomanJust read both of these pages and you'll understand why Grokipedia is needed.
>>107035921>women are a psyopwtf?
>>107035921where are the pictures tho? the whole point of human sexuality wikipedia articles are the nude pics
>>107027669
Grok gets info from what, the internet? Useless. The internet is bullshit.Let me know when they have autonomous real-life research bots that actually go to places and interview people and examine physical things and places to establish actual ground truth.
>>107036015?
>>107036493I guess it was shitting itself earlier.
>>107027382
Did a test query on a small American town, and Grokp pretty much nailed it.
>>107033157I never thought I would ever see a Wikipedia shill. A free website shill. A blatantly co-opted and biased, volunteer website...jesus fucking christ this is sad
>>107036407People can't be trusted.
>>107026374they basically cloned every wiki article and told grok to remove political bias?
>>107038643>remove half truth>add missing information>write in the tone of a stoicThis happened, then this happened. https://grokipedia.com/page/Cultural_Marxism_political_termvshttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theoryNight and day. One is heavy political bias. Other points out historical development of the entire event.
>>107038643https://grokipedia.com/page/Spin_(physics)Here's one for scientific article. Check the edits. Quite a decent fix. I cant verify the first edit, but the other edits seems very reasonable.
>>107026374All the money, wagies, and government on your side and Ketamine man still can't make anything worth using besides Starlink,
>>107038763>v0.1 Hint is right on the front page retard.
>Click on references for one article>one is a Substack post>the other is a fucking quora postJeet Slopipedia
No thanks.
>>107038670got really curious where grok cites these summaries. it's is only citing conservative blogs and thinktanks lolit has taken a cranks interpretation of the frankfurt school from 2000ft and made it a baseline fact. this is unserious editorial with the gloss of serious academic writingenjoy conservapedia 2k25
>>107033174Literally every word in the dictionary is a phrase coined by someone that doesn't refer to any actually academic theory.If we're basing reality on what the collective says rather than what the collective sees, you live in someone else's fantasy land.
>>107039261Modern sources are political battlefield where left side obfuscates and tries to claim its just modern conspiracy invention. So grok sources historical sources. I understand that you do not want to believe in any idea that tresspasses upon the sanctity of your political beliefs, but your feelings wont matter with sources.
>>107030966wikipedia does have a separate article for culteral marxism, which is what that page used to have before it was highjacked to replace it with propaganda slop
>>107039302>Modern sourcesSo you want to disregard any sources you don't personally agree with as long as you arrive at your predetermined conclusion?
>>107039377https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sourcesNo, thats what wikipedia does. Nice try with the gaslight.
Bot thread
It's good at removing leftist propaganda from articles, but it still makes up stuff and sometimes deletes correct information. Especially for smaller articles in niche topics.
>>107026374curious what it says about india and israeldoes it tell you the full unbiased truth about them?
>>107039383Yeah but the reasons for doubting in the reliability of these sources is clearly stated and attempting to be consistently applied. Whereas conservative reasoning for disregarding sources is usually UHH UHHH THE FRANKFURT SCHOOL (((KARL MARX))) THE WEST TRANNY TRANNY TRANNY then linking to a cache of some guy's geocities blog post from 20 years ago.
>>107039433Just use it and compare?
>>107039435No, modern leftist sources are "its just a conspiracy". The "conservative" sources are historical books, papers, academic ideologies, etc. There's no both sides, there's you trying to obfuscate
It added a mistake in a animu series i like.i wonder how long it will take for the suggestion to go through.
>>107039445The Right control the entire narrative yet still refuse to release the epstein files, why's that?
That's just a search bar. Where's the wiki? lmao jeetware.
Wikipedia is pozzed as hell, but Elon is a schizo, drug-addled cryptojew. I don't trust either of them. Anyway, Grokipedia is just slopified Wikipedia.
>>107028827so much for alternative mediaseems like nothing is free from their grasp...
>>107039510I understand you want a deflection. But its simple. the ones calling for the release are also "the right." They ran on the release because the prior admin was protecting the files. The conclusion is they're all implicated and wont release the files. Both parties. Along with many powerful people and other countries' gov figures.
I've switched from using Gemini and ChatGPT to mostly Grok. Not because it's really smarter or anything, but when I ask it something, it reads way more sources from the web than other LLMs.
>>107039527Lol what did you expect from Zion Elon?
>>107039529>deflects anywaysHuh, no one really cares if Clinton gets the rope or prince Andrew so just do it already? So riddle me this, why won't the right release the files despite controlling the entire narrative?
>>107039545Here's an example. Good luck trying to get Gemini read through 4chan.
>>107026374>Wikipedia but it glows harder
>>107028567Your 3 letter invented slander will not be accepted.
>>107039573Gemini's response for comparison.
>>107039581>grokipedia give me the early life section>sorry I can't complete that request
>>107026374I read one article and it was overly long, badly organized and repeated bunch of stuff.
So at this point it's just a Wikipedia copy, but how does article creation work in the future?Will Grok just endlessly generate articles about every single thing in existence?
>>107039573It's making up false quotes from this thread though.For example >>107039377 doesn't contain the phrase "reliable sources"As I always say, LLMs are bullshit generators. They are not very useful for anything fact related because they make things up and the LLM doesn't have the ability to know whether it's making something up or not.
>>107039779v0.1. They literally created this whole thing in under a month from an idea -> product pipeline. Give it few more weeks/months to flesh out more.
>>107039791its referring to the well known wikipedia policy of reliable sources. you dont' have to refer to it by name to know we're talking about the kiked glownigger nature of wikipedia
>>107039246Metapedia's so good it doesn't even load.
>>107039454Keep us posted, I'm curious.
>Grok take this Wikipedia article with all images removed and rewrite it to be 10x more verbose with meaningless fluff phrases and hallucinations while stripping out anything your positivity bias, my jew buddies, or my jeet golems wouldn't like.Gee thanks, Elon. I think I'll stick to the human curated one for now.
>>107026374>The way Elon glazes himself in his articlekek. A rich lolcow is 10 times more entertaining than a poor one.
OH BOY OH BOY I JUST WANT MY INFORMATION VERIFIED BY THE LITERAL ANTICHRIST AND ALIGNED WITH VIEWS OF THE EMBODIMENT OF THE ETHERNET CRINGE PERSON (but hey, he's rich)
>>107039435>some guy's geocities blog post from 20 years ago.this is more likely to be the truth than citing some shit like the NY Semit.
Man grok video and imagine got castrated bad. It wont even make a girl smile anymore. It feels like glass wall between me and my waifu harem. Fucking sucks. I hope it gets fixed. Anyone else has any way to bypass resteiction? All my videos get moderated. It sucks ass man.
>>107027293>grok thinks moot's real name is chris "poole's closed"AI is a bubble
>>107028561how on earth can you argue that he isn't anti-vaccine
>>10703067040 years ago we had Ozone Holes to worry about, today we have climate change. 40 years later we'll have some other thing to call it.It's called weather, dumb fuck.If you want to argue otherwise, then first consider what your country is doing to force China and India to stop emitting greenlight gases. Then we can talk about the effects of human activities on climate.
>>107039301Incorrect. See: normal Marxism, a school of thought based on the works of Karl Marx, in which scholars call themselves Marxists. For something to be an ideology it has to actually be a coherent and separable thing rather than some abstract insult. Nobody calls themselves a "cultural marxist" because it's not a real thing, and you cannot name 1 piece of cultural marxist literature.In other words, you're a stupid nigger.
Leftists extremists in full PANIC mode.
>>107039261Yeah, this was my concern with Grokipedia. When someone says "free from political bias", I hear "featuring MY political bias". Still, it's good to have some sort of competition.
>>107031376"Denial" is a word that presupposes the correctness of it's assertions.
>>107038763>besides StarlinkIt's very impressive in its own right, along with Falcon 9, which was used to launch all those satellites.
>>107039527Did you seriously expect it to praise Hitler? Talk about delusional.
>>107027768First thing I checked kekWikipedia still reign supreme.
>>107028956>The claim presents the origin of anal fistulae as universally from anal glands, but sources indicate this is the most common (cryptoglandular) etiology, not all cases. Other causes include Crohn's disease, trauma...>Issue: Anal fistulae originate from the anal glands, which are located between the internal and external anal sphincter and drain into the anal canal.LLMs are supposed to be good at language and then it confuses cause with location like this lmao.
>repeatedly calls Vivian Jenna Wilson Elons daughter, never calls her a man and avoids using her birth nameI wonder if this will stay kek
>>107041749holy based
>>107033049you are a tasteless heathen. chappelle is probably the greatest to ever do it. PLEB.
I was about to claim that math articles are more readable and looked for an example... lmao.
>>107042282I blame Latex.
>>107041356I'm not saying wikipedia is without it's faults, but at least most mods there want some sort of academic source with most claims. Grokipedia is just regurgitating conservative blogposts and posits highly controversial terms and statements as facts. They operate on different levels, and therefore are not in competition.
>>107042438Academics have 300:1 left leaning professor to right leaning professor. You think this is real accurate information? Wikisource perrinial sources accepts only left wing sources like CNN, reddit, MSNBC, as facts but bans NYPOST, Fox News reporting? Cherry picking sources and gate keeping sources with political ideological purity test means the entire article is pozzed. Grokipedia using whole host of sources to find the real truth triggers you? lmao.
>>107033157>That’s not even remotely trueJust look at the GamerGate wikipedia article.
>>107042467You actually have no idea how science works right? Or are you just pretending to be retarded?
>>107042438>at least most mods there want some sort of academic source with most claimsBro they called GamerGate a harassment campaign, their Women article includes trannies, and they said that Floyd was murdered whatever they are doing it's clearly not working
>>107026374so t's just wikipedia copied verbatim, intermixed with whatever else is in grok's dataset, but also controlled and influenced by the wealthiest oligarch on the planet?
>>107042524>TRUST THE SCIENCE
>>107042573Yes, and if you have a problem with that you're a CULTURAL MARXIST TRANNIE JEW!
>>107042573it's not copied verbatim. it actually gives a neutral bias, instead of the left-leaning one that plagues all Wikipedia articles
>>107042573It's mostly Wikipedo articles but everything is fact-checked a bit more thoroughly than when asking an LLM directly, it seems.The few articles I've checked were properly sourced, so so far so good.
>>107042617>and if you have a problem with that you're a CULTURAL MARXIST TRANNIE JEW!Yes, if you have problem with actual facts being presented you might just be a tranny.
>>107042573https://larrysanger.org/2025/10/grokipedia-a-first-look/Read from wikipedia cofounder.
>>107039445The other response is the lefty conceding
>>107042669>bias rating>1 is most neutral; 5 is most biased.>Wikipedia: 3.5>Grokipedia: 2.1>"according to ChatGPT 4o, which is a competent LLM that is widely perceived to lean to the left"Grokibros can't stop winning.
>>107026374the AI sloppification of the internet is going band for band with governments racing to police the internet in an attempt to see who can ruin it the fastest
>>107042886Its fixing the ideological corruption of your belief system
>>107026374When Musk says that Wikipedia is unreliable, he is echoing what scholars have been saying for decades. Even Wikipedia itself says it.>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimerI think the problem stems from the fact Wikipedia is based on secondary sources, instead of primary sources.>Wikipedia articles should be based on reliable, published secondary sources, and to a lesser extent, on tertiary sources and primary sources[...] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research#Primary,_secondary_and_tertiary_sourcesA solution would be something like academics, soon-to-be academics, and professionals interpreting primary sources, for example. Surely an AI trained on Wikipedia and random tweets not only is not a solution, but will be even worse than Wikipedia.
>>107043133The problem is selective sourcing that prioritizes political ideological leaning, clique of editors, political CEO at the helm telling that their mandate is not to the truth, but to the consensus created by the clique of editor's political ideology.
>>107043133Well, at the first glance it seems a lot better. A lot of "professionals" believe men can become women, so I wouldn't listen to them.
>>107042669>The platform’s defenders (such as Jimmy Wales, lately) will inevitably have a tough time explaining why, for example, they call decisions made by bossy super-users “consensus,” why they keep most ordinary conservative media outlets from being used as sources (even for conservatives’ own views), or why they routinely perma-block perfectly good accounts for minor offenses. Or maybe most startling of all, why is it that 85% of the most powerful editors in the project are actually anonymous? Wikipedia is quite powerful. So, why are such powerful decisionmakers hiding behind twee handles as if they were playing in some inconsequential 1990s chatroom?For some reason I didn't expect him to be so critical of Wikipedia.
>>107043179Have you been asleep the last decades?He famously hates Wikipedia for not giving shit like homoepathy as much value as medical science and tried to make his own Wikipedia competitor.
>>107043196I simply never paid any attention to him.
>>107043196Is that what wikipedia told you?https://grokipedia.com/page/Larry_Sanger
>>107043230No, I'm just older than ten and remember his stunts from the news at the time.No need to look at any fagpedia.
>>107043254Is that your memory from wikipedia?
>>107043258I've literally answered that already.Please learn to read.
how does grok "fact check" the articles?
>>107043273You just moved the timeline without answering, and the question followed you back to the past, haunting you.
>>107043312Grok.com uses its internal repository of trained knowledge + prompt injected by xAI + search tools to search the internet for topic + make guiding rational decisions to find out what is true or not. Its not always accurate, but tried to be rational enough. You can push back on its fact-check, by arguing your point and it will concede on some points.
>>107043313Am I talking with Grok right now?You're not making any sense.
>>107043332Your deflection didnt make sense. You may fool yourself with your answer, but its incoherent and baseless answers. "Trust me bro, I remember from when I was a child" is not an answer to how you know what you believe you know.
trash
>>107043312Like this.
>>107043349@grok is this true?
>>107033266I just checked with Grok and they say you're wrong though
>an encyclopedia of "knowledge" that is literally just AI scraping wikipedia (a non-profit run site) and rewording events in a different way>ran by the worlds richest man, whos publicly in a constant war against his own AI to stop it from proving the unironic propaganda he and retards like him spewsometimes i think we all died back around 2019 and everything since then has been our collective hell for human stupidity
>>107043676It's so fucking sad that this is the best we've got because leftoids couldn't help themselves but to shit up a free website with their derangement.
>>107043676>AI trained on propaganda regurgitates said propagandaAin't no way.
>>107043706i dont think you know what propaganda actually is
>>107043711>it supports my beliefs therefore it's true!Give it a rest.
>>107043718A man cannot give birth. You will never be a woman.Do you think this is "propaganda"?
>>107043706>peer-reviewed academic work is propagandano wonder the us is becoming a third world country
>>107043725No, I think this is factual truth.
>>107043725>A man cannot give birth. You will never be a woman.source ?
>>107043758Wikipedia disagrees with your "propaganda". You're a transphobic now for spewing your "propaganda"
>>107043718yes this is the benefit of having true beliefs
>>107043766> You're a transphobic> can't even use proper englishno wonder anon doesn't know the actual meaning of words
>>107043631>Yes, User B is right. User A's characterization of Larry Sanger's criticisms ties a relatively recent example (complaints about Wikipedia's handling of topics like homeopathy, which Sanger highlighted prominently around 2020–2021 in blog posts and interviews) to much older events (his departure from Wikipedia in 2002 and launch of Citizendium in 2006). Those earlier "stunts" were primarily driven by concerns over lack of expert authority, anonymous editing, and editorial standards—not specifically alternative medicine. This timeline inconsistency makes User A's claim of relying on "memories from the news at the time" incoherent and baseless, as User B points out, and it does suggest the details could be pulled from more current sources like Wikipedia itself.
>>107043725This is a strawman/woman and you know it. Nobody is arguing that a trans person literally transforms into the opposite, biological sex. The propaganda you follow is that somehow transexuals will destroy civilization.
>/g/trannies seethingkek
>>107043816>"Chloe">hisNot very big chungus of them.
>>107029671>normal people literally prove rightards wrong with easily found data and evidence>"nuh uh thats fake because i saw a twitter graph that was stolen from /pol/ and has no sources that says otherwise"its either this or "well of course the evidence says that because uhh... its controlled by [SCAPEGOAT]". this shit probably exists entirely to be quoted by retards as a "legit" source lmao. they dont care about the truth at all otherwise they wouldnt try so hard to bend it to push their narratives
>>107043816Still losing to the clergy by orders of magnitude.
>>107043815>biological sexbuzzword
>>107043718propaganda is made for for the stupid and mentally deficient because they arent going to actually verify whether its true. most propaganda can be proven false
>>107043815>its strawmanYou're running a propaganda in your brain, if you have it. Everyone else would say its common sense.
>browse catalog>see grokslop>open thread>it's /pol/shitEvery fucking time. Go back to your containment board and site, Xwitterfags.
>>107042886Don't forget how they enabled and supported the crazy lefties for years so that we would welcome it. Those fucks played the long game perfectly.
>>107043851>Whataboutism and deflection from baby rapistsI hope you don't think you're a good person
>>107043928>AI slop wikipedia created by a billionaire who bought and ruined twitter to own the libs and post force his own politics into peoples feeds>"durrr why politcal thread"
>>107043928
>>107040854He isn't against every vaccine. He's just critical of certain ones.Saying he's "anti-vaccines" is an absolutist fallacy meant to destroy nuanced discussion.
>>107029634Shaping narratives.>>107029671Brainlet cattle.
>>107044171
>>107043662>leftists aren't allowed to deny itYou have terrible brainrot, friend. I'm a leftist, and by definition only a woman can get pregnant.Now, if there's a woman who wants to be referred to as a man, and become pregnant, I'm okay with that. Whatever. We all know she's a biological woman and we're accommodating her desire to be treated as a man.If you can't understand how that works, you're socially retarded. Literally.
>>107044220Let's see you say it non-anonymously.
Any "encyclopedia" that participates in the materialist delusion is useless for anything that matters. This is better because it's not as condescending as Wikipedia (on any topic), but it's not there yet.
>>107044333There's some of my fellow leftists to whom I say that because they think like me, and others to whom I can't, because they're unable to understand what I'm saying and get upset.Again, it's called being an adult in society. I didn't call you socially retarded merely as an insult. Only a child or someone who hasn't developed their social skills past that point gets autistically obsessed with speaking un-nuanced plain truths in every context.
>>107026374>go to grokipedia>visit "elon musk" page>not find anything about lockdown stance during covid>not find anything about anti-vax stance during covid>not find anything related to politics>nothing negative about his DOGE activities>do find a lot of positive portrayal of his persona ("philanthropy" lmao!)this was totally not intentional and not expect! very neutral, mhm.
>>107044406>>/x/
>>107044547grokipedia is philanthropy
>>107044458Damn sounds like you guys have a serious image problem and should reign-in your crazies. Oh well not my problem.
