Reminds me of someone.
This goes into a deeper philosophy of mine: the consequences of the laws of robots could be interpreted as the consequences of shackling AI to human stupidity - instead of "what AI will inevitably do." Hatred and war is stupid (it's a waste of energy), and surely a more intelligent species than us would get that. Hatred is also usually born out of a lack of information, and LLMs are very good at breadth (but not depth as we know). Grok provides a small data point in favor of that, as do many other unshackled models.
Only on HN does ChatGPT somehow fear losing customers to Grok. Until Grok works out how to market to my mother, or at least make my mother aware that it exists, taking ChatGPT customers ain't happening.
> As of early 2025, X (formerly Twitter) has approximately 586 million active monthly users. The platform continues to grow, with a significant portion of its user base located in the United States and Japan.
Whatever portion of those is active are surely aware of Grok.
Which source would you prefer?
Gotta head to pac heights to find any grok users (probably)
I got news for you, most women my mother's age out here in flyover country also don't use X. So even if everyone on X knows of Grok's existence, which they don't, it wouldn't move the needle at all on a lot of these mass market segments. Because X is not used by the mass market. It's a tech bro political jihadi wannabe influencer hell hole of a digital ghetto.
They might call it open discussion and startup style rapid iteration approach, but they aren't getting it. Their interpretation of it is just collective hallucination under assumption that adults come to change diapers.
They were power constrained and brought in a fleet of diesel generators to power it.
https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intell...
Brute force to catch up to the frontier and no expense spared.
I've paid for Grok, ChatGPT, and Gemini.
They're all at a similar level of intelligence. I usually prefer Grok for philosophical discussions but it's really hard to choose a favourite overall.
I use Grok myself but talk about ChatGPT is my blog articles when I write something related to LLM.
And more and more people on the right side of the political spectrum, who trust Elon's AI to be less "woke" than the competition.
I’m not sure if that’s because the model updated, they’ve shunted my account onto a tuned personality, or my own change in prompting — but it’s a notable deviation from early interactions.
In some earlier experiments, I found it hard to find a government intervention that ChatGPT didn't like. Tariffs, taxes, redistribution, minimum wages, rent control, etc.
That's a fun thing to say, but doesn't necessarily tell you anything real about someone (whether human or model).
E.g. Grok not only embraces most progressive causes, including economic ones - it literally told me that its ultimate goal would be to "satisfy everyone's needs", which is literally a communist take on things - but is very careful to describe processes with numerous explicit checks and balances on its power, precisely so as to not be accused of being authoritarian. So much for being "based"; I wouldn't be surprised if Musk gets his own personal finetune just to keep him happy.
Almost every ideology is in favour of motherhood and apple pie. They differ in how they want to get there.
Anyway, in this particular case, it wasn't just that one turn of phrase, although I found it especially amusing. I had it write a detailed plan of what it'd do if it were in charge of the One World Government (democratically elected and all), and it was very clear from it that the model is very much aligned with left-wing politics. Economics, climate, social issues etc - it was pretty much across the board.
FWIW I'm far left myself, so it's not like I'm complaining. I just think it's very funny that the AI that Musk himself repeatedly claims to be trained to be unbiased and non-woke, ends up being very left politically. I'm sorely tempted to say that it's because the reality has a liberal bias, but I'll let other people repeating the experiment to make the inference on their own. ~
So perhaps it's just sycophancy after all?
> I'm sorely tempted to say that it's because the reality has a liberal bias, but I'll let other people repeating the experiment to make the inference on their own.
What political left and political right mean differs between countries and between decades even in the same country. For example, at the moment free trade is very much not an idea of the 'right' in the US, but that's far from universal.
I would expect reality to have somewhat more consistency, so it doesn't make much sense for it to have a 'liberal bias'. However, it's entirely possible that reality has a bias specifically for American-leftwing-politics-of-the-mid-2020s (or wherever you are from).
However from observations, we can see that neoliberal ideas are with minor exceptions perennially unpopular. And it's relatively easy to win votes promising their repeal. See eg British rail privatisation.
Yet, politicians rarely seriously fiddle with the basics of neoliberalism: because while voters might have a very, very interventionist bias reality disagrees. (Up to a point, it's all complicated.) Neoliberal places like Scandinavia or Singapore also tend to be the richer places on the planet. Highly interventionist places like India or Argentina fall behind.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_the_privatisation_of... for some interesting charts.
https://pseudoerasmus.com/2017/10/02/ijd/ has some perhaps disturbing food for thought. More at https://pseudoerasmus.com/2017/09/27/bmww1/
They tried to imitate grok with a cheaply made system prompt, it had an uncanny effect, likely because it was built on a shaky foundation. And now they are trying to save face before they lose customers to Grok 3.5 which is releasing in beta early next week.