15 ms·
Turns Out, Wikipedia Isn't That 'Woke' as Grokipedia Rips Off Most of Its Pages
- ChrisArchitect 1y agoDiscussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45726459 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45726459 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45737044 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45737044
- burnte 1y agoMusk said it was full of partisans a bias, and the reality is the reverse. Too many confuse "you're biased" with "I don't like that."
- sharperguy 1y agoWhile I recognize the dangers of splintering sources of truth into various fragmented opinion spaces, if you were to fork wikipedia it would make sense to simply clone all the information there and only change the parts that you consider false. Ideally, you make a reasonable case for why particular sources approved by wikipedia are invalid and why some sources considered invalid by wikipedia are indeed valid, and systematically remove all claims covered by invalid sources while verifying further modifications against the updated set of sources.
- lenerdenator 1y agoWe need more Jimmys and fewer Elons.
- kulahan 1y agoI'm 99.999% sure this is already the case. I can't think of even one other Elon. I guess some billionaires come close, but he's a pretty unique dude, for better or for worse.
- happytoexplain 1y agoThe parent's condition was relative, so it can't be statically true. Even if the number of Elons was zero, that would only make it unsatisfiable - not true.
- lenerdenator 1y ago> I can't think of even one other Elon. I guess some billionaires come close, but he's a pretty unique dude, for better or for worse. Nah there are already too many people who take pride in taking public resources and locking them behind a paywall/data mining platform because they seem to have a personality that drives them to get more money even though they already have more than they could conceivably spend in many, many human lifetimes. Elon just does it while being a terminally online edgelord. If he were just a terminally online edgelord without the money, I wouldn't care. The average western high school is full of people like that. That's what I meant by "we need fewer Elons".
- bad_username 1y agoWe need more Larry Sangers. https://larrysanger.org/nine-theses/ https://larrysanger.org/nine-theses/
- mikkupikku 1y agoI expected they would. I was curious if they'd copy the errors too, so I checked my go-to example of errors on wikipedia lasting for years. Wikipedia's version: > Brilliant Pebbles was a non-nuclear system of satellite-based interceptors designed to use high-velocity, watermelon-sized, teardrop-shaped tungsten projectiles as kinetic warheads.[79][80] It was designed to operate in conjunction with the Brilliant Eyes sensor system. The project was conceived in November 1986 by Lowell Wood at LLNL.[81] Detailed studies were undertaken by several advisory boards, including the Defense Science Board and JASON, in 1989. Grok's version: > The Brilliant Pebbles program, initiated in 1990 by the Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO), represented a shift toward distributed, cost-effective constellations of micro-satellites, each approximately 45-100 kg and equipped with autonomous processors for onboard target discrimination and interception. Both contain errors, although different errors.
- Herring 1y agoThis has been tried many times, eg conservapedia comes to mind. It rarely works. You generally have to take over a successful brand then drive it to the ground. You can't just start off with a shitty brand when there are alternatives.
- normalaccess 1y agoI think all Grokipedia is doing is exposing Grok's internal LLM "facts" into a preloaded and formatted site. Modern LLMs already have all of wikipedia internalized and can act as a wiki so why not make it an explicit feature? Once that is in place you can make Grok eat it's own tail by using Retrieval-Augmented Generation on Grok with Grokaiedia (that is now crowdsourced for updates). This may offset the side effects of model collapse from AIs consuming their own synthetic outputs with enough humanity sprinkled into the mix.
- Herring 1y agoYes and also Hitler is quite interesting outside the Nazi bit. I don't know why everyone obsesses over that.
- normalaccess 1y agoI have no clue what you are referring too. The word Nazi gets used so much and for so many things that it has lost all meaning to me due to semantic satiation. You'll have to me more specific. Semantic satiation -- a psychological phenomenon in which repetition causes a word or phrase to temporarily lose meaning for the listener,[1] who then perceives the speech as repeated meaningless sounds. Extended inspection or analysis (staring at the word or phrase for a long time) in place of repetition also produces the same effect.
- array_key_first 1y agoTurns out having your ideology be fundamentally post-truth and anti-education means you don't make a very good knowledge base! Whodda thunk?
- JohnTHaller 1y agoReality has a well-established liberal bias
- delaminator 1y agoexcept for the first 300,000 years
- array_key_first 1y agoIf you actually look back towards all of human history and analyze the conservative and progressive positions at the time, you will find yourself almost exclusively siding with progressives. Conservatism, as an ideology, is built on the belief that conservatism has always been wrong, until about 20 years ago to just now. That's what they're trying to conserve: always the very, very near past.
- AnimalMuppet 1y agoI don't think that's accurate. Many US conservatives think that the US Constitution and the Federalist Papers have ideas that are right and are worth conserving. Many would think that the ideas of limited government and government by the people are worth preserving.
- array_key_first 1y agoFrom what I've seen, close to zero US conservatives think that right now. They might say they think that, but obviously you can't just listen to people. You have to look at their actions.
- palmotea 1y ago> Conservatism, as an ideology, is built on the belief that conservatism has always been wrong, until about 20 years ago to just now. That's hilariously wrong: you're basically claiming current-day conservatives [or at least Trump I conservatives, if you want to be hyper-literal) are all about conserving [Democratic-party] Clintonism. Pretty soon they'll all in on Obamacare? You're trying to be clever but have no idea what you're talking about.
- SilverElfin 1y agoRipping off most of its pages doesn't mean it isn't woke. You can copy content on most of the noncontroversial topics that don't have political or ideological angles, while still offering different content on the topics that do.
- timdaub 1y agoHey, if anyone thinks this article was wrongfully flagged, please contact me via my email in the description and lets talk. I'm building a startup related to moderation on social media so I'd like to user interview you
- xigoi 1y agoI find it curious that the Wikipedia article on George Floyd specifically mentions in the first sentence that the police officer was white. Grokipedia’s description seems more neutral.
- archagon 1y agoI mean, it may be difficult to understand or properly contextualize the subsequent BLM movement without pointing out the racial aspect of this execution.
- xigoi 1y agoThe “racial aspect” is a projection of people who want to make everything about race. Do you think the situation would’ve been different if the officer was black?
- CupricTea 1y agoIt's an open secret that encyclopedia authors, dictionary authors, and map makers all plagiarize one another, to the point where cartographers have added fictitious "trap streets" to catch others from plagiarizing their maps, and lexicographers have added Mountweazels. It doesn't surprise me nor does it upset me that Grokipedia would include Wikipedia as an input source, nor do I feel like they're hypocritical for doing so given their stated goals. If you think a source has a bias problem, it makes sense to use that source for reference while applying your own bias checking to it.