7 ms·
As someone developing agents using LLMs on various platform, im very reluctant to use anything associated with xAI. Grok's training data is increasingly pulled
by SimianSci 1y ago
As someone developing agents using LLMs on various platform, im very reluctant to use anything associated with xAI.
Grok's training data is increasingly pulled from an increasingly toxic source.
Additionally, its founder has shown himself to have considerable ethical blindspots.
Ive got enough second-order effects to be wary of. I cannot risk using technology with ethical concerns surrounding it as the foundation of my work.
- nomel 1y ago> Grok's training data is increasingly pulled from an increasingly toxic source. What's this in reference to?
- thanhhaimai 1y agoIt refers to this: https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/musks-xai-buys-social-media-platform-x-45-billion-2025-03-28/ https://www.reuters.com/markets/deals/musks-xai-buys-social-... > "xAI and X's futures are intertwined," Musk, who also heads automaker Tesla and SpaceX, wrote in a post on X: "Today, we officially take the step to combine the data, models, compute, distribution and talent."
- ActorNightly 1y agoProbably the recent shenanigans about holocaust denial-ism being blamed on a "programming error".
- kentm 1y agoThey've also been caught messing with system prompts twice to push a heavily biased viewpoint. Once to censor criticism of the current US administration and again to push the South Africa white genocide theory contrary to evidence. Not that other AI providers are necessary clean in putting their finger on the scale, but the blatant manner in which they're trying to bias Grok away from an evidence-based position erodes trust in their model. I would not touch it in my work.
- fallingknife 1y agoHas any AI company not been caught doing this? Grok is just doing it in the opposite direction. I hate it too, but let's not pretend we don't know what's going on here.
- kentm 1y agoI think conflating what other companies have been doing with what Grok is doing is disingenuous personally. Most other AI stuff has had banal "brand safety" style guards baked in. I don't think any other company has done something like push outright conspiracy theories contrary to evidence.
- fallingknife 1y ago"brand safety" is just a term for aligning with a particular bias
- tempodox 1y agoEveryone is biased. Pushing conspiracy theories is something else entirely.
- kentm 1y agoNot all biases are equivalent. "Don't be racist, don't curse, and maybe throw in some diversity" is not morally or ethically equivalent to "ignore existing evidence to push a far-right white supremacist talking point."
- bilbo0s 1y agoUh, guy, it's called a bias to make money as opposed to a bias towards not making money. Being in favor of making money with the company you create is not a bad thing. It's a good thing. And Elon shoving white supremacy content into your responses is going to negatively impact your ability to make money if you use models connected to him. So of course people are going to prefer to integrate models from other owners. Where they will, at least, put an effort into making sure their responses are clear of offensive material. It's business.
- tempodox 1y ago[flagged]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- downrightmike 1y ago"ethical blindspots" That is all on purpose, he sees them, and decides they matter less than his opinion.
- jrflowers 1y ago>its founder has shown himself to have considerable ethical blindspots. The guy is very vocal and clear about his ethical stances. Saying he has “blind spots” is like saying the burglars from the Home Alone movies had ethical blind spots around personal property
- touristtam 1y agoValid concerns here. I don't even see why this comment was flagged. Is there a cohort of YC users that have an agenda against this sort of opinion?
- archagon 1y agoI would not be surprised if X/Grok management forced staff to make social media flagging runs throughout the day. Just look at the insane comment graveyard for this post.