2 ms·
This reads like a sponsored article promoting xAI, without clear ethical disclosure. While it appears to be about AI-generated games in general, it focuses sole
by stared 2y ago
This reads like a sponsored article promoting xAI, without clear ethical disclosure. While it appears to be about AI-generated games in general, it focuses solely on Grok-generated content.
Other models often perform better (https://web.lmarena.ai/ https://web.lmarena.ai/, https://aider.chat/docs/leaderboards/ https://aider.chat/docs/leaderboards/) - I have yet to meet anyone who uses Grok as their primary programming assistant.
- cc62cf4a4f20 2y agoI've spent a lot of hours vibe coding with sonnet 3.7 thinking and I'm not seeing anything in the article that jumps out at me as being different from my experience.
- _ea1k 2y agoI use it as my primary coding assistant, when I'm able to. I haven't paid for the more advanced models from others, and it seems to be the most advanced free-to-use thinking model at the moment. Aider can't use grok 3 with thinking yet, afaik, because xai hasn't made it available in the API. From what I'm hearing, it and Claude 3.7 "thinking" are very similar in performance.
- tempaway47474 2y agoLol at the idea that The Guardian would promote grok, or that the article is making grok look good