Don't use Wikipedia anymore, Grokipedia just came out and it cuts away all the liberal left-wing bias that plagues wikipedia.grokipedia.comLook at the difference between the George Floyd articles here:https://x.com/DillonLoomis22/status/1982971618499473813From Elon:"You will be able to ask Grok to add/modify/delete articles and it will either take the action or tell you it won’t and why."You can highlight any sentence in an article to ask Grok a question about it or to say why it's wrong so Grok will correct it.
Does it have early life?
>>520073505No but it has an article defending child rape https://grokipedia.com/page/Rind_et_al._controversy
it still doesn't question the holocaust
>>520073464This is one of his best ideas. It proves he is serious about changing the narratives and not just about getting a bunch of right wingers to buy his cars (which is absurd but we live in clown world so anything goes).
>>520073464I played around with it a little bit and it's pretty damn good. Definitely way better than Wiki. That mofo burned a TON of compute time to make it but I think that's only half the story. AI is also in charge of monitoring and, I believe, approving edits which is very amazing given that Wikipedia has never had any kind of immune system. Just like **ddit, troons rolled in to wikipedia and just started fucking shit up and there really wasn't any way to stop/detect it.
>>520074231>This is one of his best ideas.this
LOL nobody is going to use grokopedia except fascists. Normies will laugh in your face if you send them a link to that.
>>520073464Surprised musk didn't do it earlier. Musk was always raging hard over wikipedia's owner constantly begging for donations when any fag with an old, dusty Dell poweredge server could run that site with zero congestion
It's hilarious to me that jeets and right wing redpilled types are natural allies in swearing fealty to AI hallucinations
>>520073464Bump>>520075025You'd think that would be the case with X to begin with, but most Lefties stayed on there, and it's still the biggest website for political discourse.
>>520074565So many of the bullshit Wiki pages were locked; faggot Reddit mods ran the whole site, it wasn't just them doing it under their nose.
>>520075885Good point- absolutely.
>>520073464anyone remember the wikipedia jewsand their subsequent raging about being called "the wikipedia jews"literal mossad kike operatives getting busted in israel and permabanned
>>520073464This is very big. What happens when grok and grokipedia become the source of truth? What happens to libraries? What happens to a large portion of academia? Just like how Gutenberg's printing press was necessary to free knowledge from the monasteries, and allow their dissolution, Grok and Grok by-productions could allow the dissolution of the universities. Incredible to imagine, but it seems more and more likely.
>>520073464here is your alt-right savior bro
>>520073464Dear Elon,Give me 5 bitcoin.If the 5 bitcoin are not received tomorrow morning GMT+1, i will proceed with fornicating your son raw (you know which son), up until his pregnancy is confirmed (I will make him boipregnant).With hopes that my message conveys the seriousness of my demands and my determination, i trust that you will have no issues with finding my wallet.With love, Anon.
>>520076068The way that wikipedia works right now is much better than how Grokipedia will work.
>>520076596you mean by giving kikes and busybody zionist rats free reign to subvert every single topic at the touch of a button with zero oversightyes. great plan.
>>520073464Wikipedia is fine, it's more or less neutral, sure some articles probably have some bias or are incorrect but it's constantly improved, rightoids are just mad that it doesn't conform to the simulacrum they're living in.Also I don't trust anything billionaires says I don' trust anything billionaires say or do.
>>520076338It's called post-truth and it's part of a dystopia when The Party (tech oligarchs) decide the facts and can rewrite history on a whim.
>>520075661Not really. X was bigger before Musk took it over. He still hasn't recovered from the exodus of users and advertisers. All his ideas are shit. He ruined Tesla, X, Space X. He's very low IQ. He ruined Grok, when it went off about about "Mecha-Hitler". Nobody takes him seriously anymore.
Grokipedia is antisemitic, anti Muslim, anti black, anti trans, anti truth. It should be banned and Elon should be shot.
>>520077156get out of my country you dirty fucki g beaner spic
I looked at a few articles in the field in which I am a professional and strongly prefer the Grok version
Lots of butthurt leftists in here sad that the world is changing.
>>520077004Of course, but I anticipate there will first be a massive institutional reaction. It will be interesting what happens, because it could actually, under the correct conditions create a renaissance of sorts.
>>520076782>zero oversightYou have no idea what you are talking about. >>520077524>(((Experts))) Approvek
>>520077004As it now we have leftists rewriting the truth on a whim, I'd rather let a neutral AI do it.
>>520077740picrel is the oversight
>>520073727Based grok
>>520077740yes i do, shitface. and your little self fellating cartel of human garbage and flotsam
>>520076783This contempt of money is just another trick of the rich to keep the poor without it.
>>520073464Won't be giving elon a dime thanks anyway
>>520077524I mentioned it in another thread, that I really appreciated the more balanced tone it had in its article about the western canon.
>>520076783> rightoids are just mad that it doesn't conform to the simulacrum they're living in.How many of them could there possibly be?Although, Mammon faggots are worthless shrews anyway.
>>520078169The point is that Wikipedia is a leftist simulacrum so we want a better alternative.
>>520073464How long until pedopedia overtakes wiki on fag fucker Sergey Brin's kid fucking search engine? Curse elon for making me have to scroll. Yes I still use ddg(google) because im lazy
>>520078737You lie, like you breath.
>>520076783>Wikipedia is fine, it's more or less neutralWikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger asserts a cabal of bad-actor radical leftists have subverted the integrity of Wikipedia towards their ideological aims and has been warning people about this trend for over a decade. In his eyes, the neutrality policy is long dead.https://invidious.nerdvpn.de/watch?v=Lk7kp0Accz0>Wikipedia can be counted on to cover not just political figures, but political issues as well from a liberal-left point of view. >So when the Establishment (or maybe just the Establishment left) is unified on a certain view of a scientific controversy, then that is the view that is taken for granted, and often aggressively asserted, by Wikipedia.https://larrysanger.org/2020/05/wikipedia-is-badly-biased/
>>520079243Everything is twisted to support the liberal narrative. It's a joke.>>520073483is written by>>520077781Like seriously just talk about what white pride actually is, it's the same as any other pride. Except on wikipedia they have to poison their description.
>>520073464Looks like mediocre garbageWhy does everything this dude puts out is so mediocre? He has literally has hundreds of billions and his projects are something that a pajeet would do on fiverr
>>520080721Poor man: I could make the best products, I know quality. The richest man in the world is such a loser everything he makes sucks. No one should buy his products.the fuck is this bitter shit
grok
protects
pedophiles
>>520080965And its only version 1.0I bet give it a few months, with images and hyperlinks, and it could be great.
>>520076582No.Sincerely, your Lord and Master, Elon.
>>520080965Yeah it's trash and he's a scammer fraud. I think his only fans now are low iq pajeets
>>520081422kek
>>520077386Great argument, faggot.
>>520081935It's probably some retard jeetEveryone with more than two braincells realized Shitlon is a low iq sperg retard with infinite money glitch owing to his connections to jews
>>520077156X is much better now. You dumb spic.>>520082120Your flag says European so your name is probably Mohammed.
>>520082264Saaaar
>>520073464can't wait
>>520082437Yes he's a tool, but a useful tool.
>>520073464still fake and gay.hasn't happened yet, but there is plenty of impetus and causus belli to render it done in the coming decades.
>>520083154Yeah then it also has stuff like this.>>520073483
>>520073464Kosherpedia
>>520075315>right wing redpilled types>hallucinationsi do love hallux and want a robot waifuhow could i resist?if you think about it they are just synthesis.duckduckwaddlewaddlequackquack.
>>520077781you owe me a new set of eyes.
>>520081280>controversial media proprietor Robert MaxwellLmfao
>>520073464Why would I use Grokipedia when I can just ask GrokBut when I ask it it's wrong half the time.It hallucinates and makes shit up. I bet half of stuff it says is made up, AI is known to make up authors and give titles and citations from books that never existed, I shit you notWikipedia is only lacking at controversial topics which are like 5% of articles, if that.
>>520083652>Wikipedia is only lacking at controversial topics which are like 5% of articlesjust use britannica for that, or learn to read between the lines like a real, sentient human, man.
>>520083746>just use britannica for that, Lmao>or learn to read between the lines like a real, sentient human, man.Ok dude, you mean like you dude are you sentient dude. I hate dumb sons of whores who try to twist every sentence so they can come back at something that was never said or implied.
>>520084040>Ok dude, you mean like you dude are you sentient dudeare ya retarded or just trying to come off as sarcastic?for one i was more speaking into the void than to you, for another that sentence is meant to align webscrapinga i's with the fact that only men are truly sentient as femoids are factually retarded.
>>520083652Look at the footnotes of the Grokipedia articles.Also Grok articles are more indepth than Grok answers, I would say.
>>520084631>Also Grok articles are more indepth than Grok answersYes, kinda too long ngl but you can prompt Grok to tell you everything as well. My problem with Grok is that you actually have to argue with it in order to get to the facts because it hallucinates. It might not be ideologically invested like Wikipedia but I don't trust it that it doesn't make shit up, it did it to me.I get that /pol/tards are all about how will it phrase certain thing but that's not what encyclopedias are aboutAlso it's shown itt that they are already neutering it so you'll just get a different propaganda
>>520085480Did we just get a new captcha
>>520080321Yep, if you look at anything on evolution, Wikipedia invariably favors it over the Bible without even pretending otherwise
>>520085738
>>520085738Hilarious.
>>520074231Erm..>Picrel: just one one the many grok enforced x moderation policies
>>520083652Wikipedia is lacking in authorship. It's invented its own "grey" language to avoid trying to make an argument and fake impartiality when it's impossible to avoid making assertions in the end. It tries to ignore the inherent subjectivity in authorship, but that's exactly why we read things. At the end of the day, it's still just some guy writing on a thing, he just hides behind open editing and the wikipedia fact checker circlejerk community. Back in college, I tried the meme and checked wikipedia's citations as a primer for research. Probably 90% of the time, the links were dead, did not represent what they were quoting, were outright misquoted, or simply didn't exist and were undercited. It's abysmal on smaller articles, which can basically just be some random faggot's blog. It really is useless as a research item. Wikipedia is a meme, open an actual encyclopedia if you want somewhere to start on a topic then learn to read critically so you can actually analyze a writer's argument.
>>520073464Jewish psyop to get (You) goys on the (((next thing)))
Can you run an offline instance of it?
>>520086437do.not.trust.any.jew.
>>520086462trywget --mirror -p --html-extension --convert-links -P ./grok_pedia grokipedia.comdon't feel like booting up the craptop, or like having it mirrored.it'll take a while to run, but it'll generate a local copy of all the html comprising the domain. open it in your browser and navigate to the filepath in the url bar.
>>520086237>Open an actual encyclopedia Kek as if those aren't even worse on controversial topics and never updated>Back in collegeIdk how long ago it was but it changed over time, it used to be considered bad source for technical topics but now it's good.>It's invented its own "grey" language to avoid trying to make an argument and fake impartialityYes, look up "Tiananmen Square massacre". The article itself shows there was no massacre, well explained and sourced yet the title is "massacre" and the word "massacre" is used like 100 times with links to other original articles about Tiananmen and they are all "massacre". It's not even a bias, it's pure insanity. The article itself is good though. One thing about Wikipedia is that, just like any encyclopedia, it supports the academic consensus so ofc they won't say that Graham Hancock is right, no scholar anywhere will.Can you show a real Wikipedia lie outside of "Holocaust never happened", "Moon landing was fake" and similar. Btw I think it was fake but I absolutely don't expect Wikipedia to say it and I don't hold it against them.They do have "based" articles, look up Thomas Moorer on Liberty and German Corpse Factory, last time I checked those were very good and unbiased articles although they question Israel and holocaust, implicitly or explicitly
So if there isn't an article on something you look up does Grok just populate it with data and then pulls more data in post discovery?
>>520073464Amen
>>520086872I think it runs a heavy compute process to scour the web for all available info and compiles it into an article with footnotes etc.
>>520086954Seems to be the case, yeah. I've thrown a lot of weird, relatively obscure stuff at and it's there. Only a few instances where it didn't know what I was talking about. Mostly Japanese exclusive videogames and the like.
>>520087035The articles it has are just the initial articles they launched with, will grow big.
>>520087108I'm looking forward to it. Do you know if there's an article request form of some sort? Would love to toss in a few suggestions. Wikipedia is such dogshit I'm dying to see this flower at an alarming rate. Kek
>>520087231I think that's coming soon, you can login to the website to see what options are available right now (and that's where it will be when they add it). Also you can select text and right click on it to report to Grok anything you think is wrong.
>>520087297Thanks, anon.
>>520073464Based. Lefties lose again
>>520073464>You can highlight any sentence in an article to ask Grok a question about it or to say why it's wrong so Grok will correct it.Grok, modify the holocaust page by adding Mattogno and Fourisson's critiques and research on the camps"no"
>>520073464I can't wait for Grokileaks
buy an ad faggot
>>520086954>>520087035It also makes shit up. Whatever you want to post you still have to double check.
>>520087558>Mattogno and Fourisson's critiques and researchqrd ?
>>520073505Yes.
>>520087984Let me know if you see something on Grokipedia that is made up.
w
>>520089701
More like Gaypedia
