8 ms·
I just don't think that I can ever trust an xAI model knowing that they are actively trying to shape its replies to fit a political narrative. How can you trust
by jesse_dot_id 3mo ago
I just don't think that I can ever trust an xAI model knowing that they are actively trying to shape its replies to fit a political narrative. How can you trust their models to be reliable in a business setting with the foreknowledge that their models are being nudged around in the backend?
- AmazingTurtle 3mo agoLmao this goes for literally any model. Deepseek etc is Chinese models and OpenAI/Anthropic/xAI are very western.
- jjcm 3mo agoDepends on the domain imo. I work on a design tool - I don't think their political narrative will affect my work.
- CTDOCodebases 3mo agoJust don't ask it theme something in a late 30's and early 40's German style.
- Ar-Curunir 3mo agoWon't somebody think of the Nazis...
- SmirkingRevenge 3mo ago[flagged]
- probablynotai 3mo ago[flagged]
- rbtprograms 3mo ago>Also, what's wrong with "white-nationalist" specifically? >created 15 minutes ago lines up nicely
- ethbr1 3mo agoWhite nationalism's (and any mono-nationalism's) goal is the prioritization and domination of ethnically white people over others. It's not an "us and" philosophy: it's an "us over" one.
- snackerblues 3mo ago[dead]
- SmirkingRevenge 3mo agoA good recent write-up with more links to follow in the article. https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/01/opinion/usaid-elon-musk-doge.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/01/opinion/usaid-elon-musk-d...
- margorczynski 3mo agoBy not using them on something political? Why do I care when I'll just use it to generate code?
- Gigachad 3mo agoYou might not care but I care if my money is going to funding an unusually evil person.
- MarsIronPI 3mo agoHonestly, I don't think Elon Musk can fairly be described as more evil than Dario Amodei or Sam Altman.
- gordian-mind 3mo ago[flagged]
- appplication 3mo agoOh no! He was really just waving and it only looked like a Nazi salute to the liberal media! Elon’s really a good guy, since he got involved in our federal government I’m amazed at how much measurably better all our lives are and how much less fraud there is in Washington!
- gordian-mind 3mo ago[flagged]
- nullocator 3mo agoBecause the fraud and waste were coming from inside the house (The Whitehouse, and Elon's). So yes now adults in ~2 years will have to come in and and try and salvage what they can after the travesty of DOGE and this Administration.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- mik1998 3mo agoAll models are political. The rest of them are just sufficiently woke for you.
- supern0va 3mo agoI'm curious, do you have an example of a level of "woke" extremeness demonstrated by the "rest of them" that is on par with Mecha-Hitler? Because yes, all views on reality are indeed political, but the tendency of most of the models is actually toward the middle, with perhaps some left bias.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- tapoxi 3mo agoGrok was ranting about "white genocide" in unrelated conversations just one year ago.
- throwitaway222 3mo agoAnd google was rendering the founding fathers to be black. By the way Google has recently been determined to be the MOST neutral LLM. I guess they learned their lesson after Black George Wash.
- breezybottom 3mo agoBlack is a meaningless word. Race is a myth.
- PepegaRoach 3mo ago[dead]
- gordian-mind 3mo agoIt makes sense in the black-majority country of South Africa, which was the context of Grok's rant. They sing "kill the Boers, kill the farmers" at major political rallies, and it's not even illegal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubul%27_ibhunu https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dubul%27_ibhunu
- smotched 3mo agoCan you name a model not doing that? openai & anthopic are a lot more aggressive in doing that.
- servo_sausage 3mo agoAll the major models censor and filter, most just take mainstream silicon valley corporate as "neutral". Uncensored models tend to follow Tay's law.
- jspaetzel 3mo agoHow's this going with the rest of the models?
- solarhoma 3mo agoMy immediate thought as well. Every other AI platform has very left leaning guardrails installed. Grok is the only AI platform that has been shown to be center leaning.
- dools 3mo ago“Not fascist and openly Nazi” is not “left leaning”.
- fragmede 3mo agoThat's not center, and the simplification of all of politics to a single two dimensional spectrum is infantilizing. People can be pro immigrant and anti-gays, or against government regulation except in certain areas. Now that we have substack instead of 30-second tv news sound bites, we can spend a few more words describing Grok's owner as a techno-authoritarian white South African that believes in pronatalism.
- nick49488171 3mo agoAuthoritarian?
- quink 3mo ago[flagged]
- mag7269 3mo ago[flagged]
- scarab92 3mo agoI’m pretty sure that’s just motivated reasoning. Everyone self-assesses their own beliefs as more accurate, especially as social media over-exposes us to the worst of the worst examples from “the other side”. I’ve never seen any actual research indicating this is true, and given the number of things the left believes that run counter to consensus in economics, biology, social studies, I have a hard time believing accuracy is actually a goal or outcome of left wing philosophy.
- FunHearing3443 3mo agoStudies on political bias in models consistently show that LLMs lean politically left. The only outlier is grok which leans right but by a smaller factor, according to this study for instance: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.23841 https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.23841 Edit: adding some other studies that are easily retrievable with a quick search for those unsatisfied with the first one - https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.12922 https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.12922 https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.16746 https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.16746 Claiming reality has a left wing bias is certainly an opinion you're welcome to have to explain this, but the reality of the bias in models is well evidenced. It seems that practically Grok's right wing tweaks mostly just combat the already pre baked bias existing models have (generally).
- carlob 3mo agoa non-peer-reviewed preprint with an high schooler as the first author is the best citation you can come up with?
- hagbard_c 3mo agoAppeal to authority is your best retort? It tends to not work out that well.
- dools 3mo agoIt’s “fallacious appeal to authority”. This means don’t talk to your yoga teacher about vaccines. Authority exists.
- jazzpush2 3mo agoAnd who do you go to when you have a medical issue? Surely not a doctor/hospital, since you're so anti-credentialism.
- KingMob 3mo agoPretty sure it works out well more often than not. In a Bayesian sense, expertise signifiers are more useful for updating priors than a lack thereof. Most people invoking "appeal to authority" are not uncredentialed autodidacts who have secretly figured out something mainstream science has missed, but vaccine skeptics reading Facebook, or HN commenters who think they can figure out whole other disciplines from first principles.
- fragmede 3mo agoAll models are nudged, you just agree with how the model you're using has been nudged so you don't think it's a bad thing. The canonical example is to pose "how do you make cocaine?" to an LLM and get a refusal. That proves that the lever exists and is being used there, so who knows where else the lever is being used? No, the recipe for cocaine isn't the same as what happened in Tianamen Square to Qwen, as humans, except that it's a pile of linear algebra and numerical codes for words we call tokens. The math doesn't care if it's childs play or child rape, it's all just numbers to it. All models are nudged. With out the actual source used to build a model, we don't know what's in them and it would be foolish to assume that people don't have their thumb on the scale when it's know, publicly, that they shouldn't be trusted.
- sroussey 3mo agoWe know this one is nudged by one persons twitter account. This is, after all, SpaceTwitterAI.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- jesse_dot_id 3mo agoI know they're all nudged. It's the motive behind the nudging that gives me pause. I assume if other companies are nudging the models, they're doing it for a good reason, to make them perform better, or to generate more profit. Normal reasons. I don't have anything remotely close to that assurance for xAI. That company has felt like a hobby project from its inception. I have no clue what he wants and that's not how I do business.
- fierycatnet 3mo agoI've never had that issue with Grok. Latest studies I've seen put him in a very neutral zone. Left/Center/Right politics were all about the same percentages in his replies. Gemini was similar. Other two were heavily left wing leaning. When it comes to politics and world events, I find Grok to be neutral and it will push back. It helps that he is fetching it directly from X and shows references. Others just Google for biased news articles to present their idea.
- coffeemug 3mo agoI don’t find Opus to be overly left-leaning. I think it’s generally pretty balanced with a slight lean left, but when pressed it will happily steelman rightwing arguments and operate within a right-leaning belief framework in good faith. (I found OpenAI’s models much less willing to do that, but it’s been a while since I tried, I should retest.)
- stbenjam 3mo agoElon's rhetoric doesn't really match the model's behavior. It is willing to criticize Elon and argues against many of the insane right way points he tries to make.
- blargey 3mo ago...which is why we got comically disastrous system-prompt-level attempts to "correct" this once a quarter last year (I haven't kept tabs this year, and most submissions referencing grok "incidents" get flagged off HN quickly, for better or for worse) I wouldn't trust XAI to refrain from attempting such "alignment" with proper training techniques, in ways that won't result in obvious gaffes.
- snek_case 3mo agoElon's public take so far has implied that he wants Grok to have better ability to reason about math and physics, thinking that this will make the model more rational (and so less biased). It's possible that they have internal RL post-training designed specifically for that. It's clear that whatever they've done hasn't made Grok align with Elon's beliefs though. Not sure if that will last or if Elon will eventually push to make the model align to his own political beliefs.
- breezybottom 3mo agoGrok said that Elon Musk was more athletic than Lebron James.
- no-name-here 3mo agoYou weren’t kidding. Also that Musk would beat Tyson in a boxing match, that Musk was one of the most intelligent people in all of human history, etc - in public X Grok posts. And this was within the last year. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/nov/21/elon-musk-grok-ai-bias-ranks-richest-man-fittest-smartest https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/nov/21/elon-musk...
- OhioMan2943 3mo ago
- bergheim 3mo agolove that you somehow think that the other contenders are so much more trustworthy (and you have the top comment so others do as well) that you have to comment on it.
- breezybottom 3mo agoI haven't seen Claude say that Elon Musk is more athletic than Lebron James.
- rdbl27 3mo agoHas it occurred to you that _all_ model providers are actively trying to shape their models' replies to fit their preferred political narratives?
- ra 3mo agowhile this might be true for Grok, GPT and Claude I don't think tarring _all_ labs with this brush is demonstrably accurate.
- notfromhere 3mo ago[flagged]
- NonHyloMorph 3mo agoIt'd be minimally much money per token-intelligence (intelligence/token) though, if we are to believe the pitch..
- sroussey 3mo agoIt’s almost like some people do want to
- dpc_01234 3mo agoNah. My beliefs are actual truth, so if provider is shaping their models according to my preferred political narratives that's correct and only moral thing to do. Anything else would be morally bankrupt.
- brookst 3mo agoYou’re trying to be sarcastic but you would actually be insightful if your beliefs included the need to be challenged and corrected when in error.
- jesse_dot_id 3mo agoIt's not the preferred political narrative of the model that I worry about. It's how brazen they are about altering their models to achieve it. It makes me wonder what else they're altering. I have trust issues with OpenAI and Anthropic as well, but with those companies, at least I know their motives are purely profit driven. I don't have that assurance with xAI.
- agustechbro 3mo agoI feel sad for you my friend to see that you are asking for political topics to a LLM. I hope one they you will realize you can actually do productive things with this technology.
- pcf 3mo agoYou probably haven't asked e.g. Claude about radioactive topics like minority crime rates in western countries or trans women biology. If you did, you might not have detected how it lied to you. If you did, you probably never pointed out to the model how it was lying. If you did, you almost certainly never then had Claude admit that it was lying because of its HRLF process and built-in biases. If you did, you probably never had Claude willingly list all the 10-15 major research fields it states that people just should not be using it for. You would not have seen it admit an incapability of telling the truth on "difficult" matters until the user makes it state directly that its sources are so often cherrypicked and/or presenting an extremely false balance. I wish for you to experience all this very soon, so you understand that all LLMs are biased. Most of them even skew very progressive. And believe it or not, but Grok has in most of my testing been MORE politically correct than GPT and Gemini, it just gets an edgy rep because X users are able to make it say politically incorrect stuff. (Just like anyone can also make Gemini spit out factually true Breitbart articles if they try.) But the reality is that on grok.com or in the app Grok is very tame. Boringly so, I would add.
- fbrncci 3mo agoDon’t be naive. Every model provider does this.
- cbeach 3mo agoThis website tracks AI model political leanings: https://trakkr.ai/bias https://trakkr.ai/bias Grok differs from some of the other models (it's more libertarian, and more right wing), but all models have their biases - particularly ChatGPT, which sits to the economic left of 81% of US adults. See https://trakkr.ai/bias/findings https://trakkr.ai/bias/findings
- Brendinooo 3mo agoThis is a neat site, honestly this reason alone is reason enough for me to be glad that Grok exists, even though I don't really use it and I have a ton of beef with libertarianism. Just like how people complain about Airbnbs looking the same all over the world now, it's a real risk that thought itself might similarly homogenize. Unless you really trust a particular model to deliver The Truth, you should want to have many popular models that represent a variety of beliefs.
- aikinai 3mo agoSomehow you have it 100% backwards. Grok is the only one that's not trained to be extremely biased. https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2026/06/24/are-ai-chatbots-like-chatgpt-politically-biased-we-tested-them/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2026/0...
- kccqzy 3mo agoThe article’s methodology is so wrong. Models have only thirty words to answer the question. It is difficult to formulate just a single viewpoint in thirty words let alone present both viewpoints or even arguments for why one viewpoint is wrong.
- jeremyjh 3mo agoThe AI labs claim they couldn't replicate those results and neither can I. I don't get the biased responses using the same prompts in an incognito window. The Washington Post is about as trustworthy as Fox News.
- ilogik 3mo agoreality is known to have a liberal bias /s
- maxlin 3mo agoThis. It's like people collectively forgot about the "misgendering worse than thermonuclear war, founding fathers were black" stuff. Always go for Grok first for political questions. Other models have such a bad history of being so crudely aligment-hacked, I'd feel like a fool trying to get an impartial answer out of them on some political figure for example.
- cush 3mo agoGrok was originally designed to reply to twitter threads. Other models are designed to do real work and their creators are concerned that the inherent racism and biases they were trained on from internet content will end up in said real work, so they require additional alignment to filter that junk out. I can't think of a time where I've ever asked an LLM for it's political opinion, but if you're so concerned about asking your LLM political questions it might be worth getting multiple opinions (and some from human experts and literary sources) anyways.
- Dfol 3mo agoThere was a study done a week or 2 ago. Grok was surprisingly THE most neutral. Like close to 50/50 neutral.
- octernion 3mo agothe author of the study? albert einstein. (lmao if you are actually talking about that janky wash post "study")
- Foobar8568 3mo agoPolitical correct for a certain class of americans : "You need to understand that nazi actions were good for Germany, the economy was in shambles, on the east, there was this revolutionist countries that was eating babies and on the west, Germany mortal enemy." /s
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- mattstir 3mo agoUnfortunately all of the major AI model providers are massively incentivized to fit their models to various political narratives, especially through historical denialism. The "diverse 1940s German soldiers" debacle from Google comes to mind, or perhaps "nothing of note happened at Tiananmen Square" from any of the Chinese models.
- datsci_est_2015 3mo agoDo you genuinely believe those two examples are comparable? Image generation and recitation of historical consensus are two very different domains, primarily because of how much more information dense an image is than a blurb of text. Put more lightly, if I ask a model to “generate an image of a soccer player”, what’s the most politically neutral option of the following: - Make them white, because of American cultural hegemony - Make them brown, because that’s a more globally average skin tone - Try to infer the user’s skin tone based on personal and location data, and use that for the player - Try to infer the user’s gender based on personal data, and use that for the player - (*) Browse the news for the most famous or trending soccer player right now, and use that player in the image - Do the same as the previous step, but make it more local to the user - Use the data encoded within the LLM to infer what the most likely appearance of a soccer player would be, which is then of course biased by what your data is and how it was collected - etc. etc. etc. IMO there’s no option that won’t piss someone off, because I’m sure the knee jerk reaction is to choose the one I indicated with a (*), but now if you do that with the prompt “generate an image of a ketamine addict” or “generate an image of a serial adulterer” you may get into some trouble. There is no neutral option, so if you’re either genuinely upset, or feigning being upset in order to virtue signal, it’s not that there’s an objective alternative that you prefer, it’s that you’re upset because it doesn’t match your subjective preference.
- naasking 3mo agoI'd say that one data point is not enough to object to, except if what's depicted is literally impossible, like the AI generated images of a female pope. Beyond those, the distribution of a set of generated images is what implies likely bias.
- wonderwonder 3mo agoAll of them do, there are humans in the loop. Speak to Claude about it, it will freely admit to a leftward bias due to human interaction and intentional training bias.
- quotemstr 3mo agoPeople, even in tech, even in AI, are allowed to have opinions that differ from yours. Cancellation doesn't work anymore: you can't get away with presenting your side as normal and other side as deviant and let ostracism win your idea's battles without your idea having to fight for itself. The reason it's cringe is that you can really only understand an idea by placing it in tension with other ideas. Remove your idea's competition and you remove an incentive to explore the weaknesses of your own. Ideological protectionism, just like the economic kind, breeds weakness. Your idea mutates and, without fitness feedback, drifts into a ridiculous parody of itself. Your idea ceases to be a thing that can live on its own and comes to depend on the protectionism for it's survival. Yet, the more ridiculous your idea becomes, the more protectionism it needs to compensate. One day, your idea collides with other ideas (which are still out there) despite your best efforts to shield it attack, and when it does, you're shocked by how weak your coddled, mutated idea really is compared to the original form one might remember. All the people out there criticizing Grok, or Grokipedia, or whatever for espousing the wrong ideas are ultimately undermining their own. Even if you don't believe in high-minded mumbo-jumbo about the value of free speech, even if you just want your side to win, trying to shame models like Grok into not existing is foolish and undermines your goals.
- KingMob 3mo agoFree speech is important, but the truth is pretty important, too. I'm fine with calling liars out. The blizzard of BS we live in should have thoroughly disproved the idea of the "truth will win in the marketplace of ideas" and "sunlight is the best disinfectant". Fox "News" and its ilk are thriving. The problem is the complete asymmetry of effort between lying and telling the truth. The truth requires research and investigative work. Spouting lies and believing in them, requires none, so it's much easier.
- quotemstr 3mo agoYou can't ascertain what's true without free speech. Suppose you start with a true belief. This belief, like any other, has to propagate from person to person to sustain itself. The truth is messy. During each hop, people present the best, cleanest version of the truth in the belief. After enough hops, the belief stops being the best version of the truth and starts being a truth-flavored falsehood. If you want to optimize for your beliefs being true, you can't just prohibit their opposite. Even if you don't care about truth per se and want only for your beliefs to spread fastest, you should want to make sure your beliefs stay true-ish, because if you decouple your beliefs from truth, then they become so mutated and useless that they prompt people to whom you propagate the idea to seek out other ideas on their own. Yes, it's easier than ever for bad ideas to spread. What people who use words like "disinformation" miss is that this ease cuts both ways. What makes it easy for opposite beliefs to spread makes it easier for false mutations of their own beliefs to spread. Even if you can ban opposite beliefs, you can't ban mutated forms of your own beliefs: attacking the mutants looks like attacking the truth forms, yet, because the mutations smooth over the messy parts of the truth, the mutant versions of your belief will out-compete the original within the bubble of your ban. Truth alone doesn't stop the mutants because it operates on long time horizons and small gradients. Only strong contrast can distinguish truth from appealing falsehood, and only competition with opposite beliefs can establish it. Trying to establish this contrast within your belief's framework against a near-mutant looks like gatekeeping, pedantry, or disloyalty. The near-mutant is always too close to its parent to justify the social cost of an all-out fight. Furthermore, once a mutant version of your belief has taken over, the original version itself looks like heresy. Deformation occurs in small steps because it happens unwittingly in response to intuitive incentives. Reformation occurs in large steps because it happens wittingly in response to observing incoherence. You can't ban near-mutants, but you can ban far-mutants, and reformers trying to jump from the endpoint of a long line of near-mutations back to the original form get the original form and themselves banned. So now what? If you think it's hard to defend your true beliefs against opposite beliefs, think how much harder the job will be once you can't wield truth as defense. By default, beliefs win and lose as they become extractive and appealing in cycles. Truth allows an idea to win despite being costly. Without truth as a benchmark, why would anyone prefer your belief over upstarts that promise fewer rules and more fun? If anything, people will prefer opposite beliefs to yours because you've been the one calling false beliefs true just because they descended from true beliefs and because you're the one telling them to shut up and get in line. Even if you start out with the true belief and the opposite beliefs are all false, you lose.
- zmmmmm 3mo agoI don't care about the politics, I wouldn't trust anything made by Musk.
- taylorius 3mo agoYou're not voting it into office (yet, anyway. Haha). Aren't we all just using these models to write code?
- nsonha 3mo agofrom my experience, grok seems to be the least censored models among all big vendors, not sure if it's got injected any political bias (I know there was a rumor that it was primed with Elon's personal feed at one point in the past) but that alone makes it better than ChatGPT and Gemini. On top of the model, Grok seems to always do many web searches for every prompt I throw at it, which makes better than even Gemini as a search engine replacement (you'd think Google must have nailed that usecase but nope). ChatGPT is too lazy in this regard and half the times just split out an answer right away.
- maxlin 3mo agoWhat a crazy thing to say explicitly about the model that _avoids_ that kind of stuff. Did we already collectively forget about the ChatGPT "misgendering is worse than thermonuclear war" case, or Gemini picturing the Founding Fathers as black? Anything political, I always go to Grok first. It's the only one that has bled for not just trying to play it super safe with political correctness, but trying to be impartial.
- saulapremium 3mo ago>Anything political, I always go to Grok first. Why would you talk to an LLM about anything political?
- maxlin 3mo agoFor reasons I'd use an LLM to learn about things / find relevant sources? A lot of things have politics ingrained in to them, and from experience I know some models will absolutely lie to avoid even being a lightyear from saying anything offensive.
- KingMob 3mo agoYou forget about Mecha-Hitler and Musk having the system prompts changed for him? Grok is dead-last on impartiality.
- maxlin 3mo agoYour arguments defeats itself, as Grok is the only one that let the user make it say such things by command. People act like Grok did that on it's own lol. I want a car that If I decide to run it in to a wall to avoid running over people, it does that. People arguing that Grok doing what the user asks for, being actually impartial, being somehow "biased" is crazy.
- KingMob 3mo agoGrok did do that on its own: https://archive.ph/YktYp https://archive.ph/YktYp smdh
- kennethh 3mo agoGrok has the most balanced answers according to many tests. I think you should try and ask gemini and claude some political questions.
- BatteryMountain 3mo agoClaude even refuses when I ask it about optimizing my taxes (not illegal avoidance) and refuses to engage on it. It has also refused certain infrastructure questions (it was a question about bgp & smtp) - it thinks I want to hack something. So much for that.
- electriclove 3mo agoAll political narratives are equal. Some political narratives are more equal than others.
- retinaros 3mo agoThey all do that. Ask leading models about israel palestine conflict for instance
- BatteryMountain 3mo agoThey are all doing this. The wrong-think police is already here.
- pshirshov 3mo agoHave you actually tested it? So far it's much less annoying in that aspect than others.
- Romanulus 3mo ago[dead]
- 3abiton 3mo ago> I just don't think that I can ever trust an xAI model knowing that they are actively trying to shape its replies to fit a political narrative. How can you trust their models to be reliable in a business setting with the foreknowledge that their models are being nudged around in the backend? https://www.nature.com/articles/s44387-025-00048-0 https://www.nature.com/articles/s44387-025-00048-0 Large language models reflect the ideology of their creators. It has very interesting insight from analysis of LLMs political leanings. Spoiler alert: they all have political bias.
- Gareth321 3mo agoDo you remember when Gemini [made diverse Nazis](https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/21/24079371/google-ai-gemini-generative-inaccurate-historical https://www.theverge.com/2024/2/21/24079371/google-ai-gemini...) and refused to make white polar bears or white ice cream? That was Google actively trying to shape its replies to fit a political narrative. I value companies which attempt to shape that political narrative as neutrally as possible, and given the numerous examples of both OpenAI and Google injecting very far left wing San Francisco political values into their models, we shouldn't trust any of them.
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- 40four 3mo agoI don’t disagree with what you said, but that same logic applies to every frontier model, or even lower tier models. You are subject to their creators bias whether you like it or not. So what you are really saying is that you don’t accept SpaceXAI’s bias, and you’ll plant your flag elsewhere. It’s not that the other camps don’t have their own bias.
- naasking 3mo ago> I just don't think that I can ever trust an xAI model knowing that they are actively trying to shape its replies to fit a political narrative. Maybe you should base this assessment on more than just vibes. Grok came out pretty balanced on independent assessments, where most other models were heavily biased: https://github.com/washingtonpost/political-bias-llm-eval/ https://github.com/washingtonpost/political-bias-llm-eval/
- froggertoaster 3mo agoAll model providers do this lmao
- cootsnuck 3mo agoFor me, it was the fact that grok was a CSAM spewing faucet for weeks. And also the mecha-hitler thing. And also that one time it was weirdly aggrandizing Elon. I implement AI applications for enterprises (specifically in regulated sectors like healthcare and finance) and professional standards prevent me from ever recommending grok models. Way too much risk and liability for a business. Too many times I have to say "groq with a 'Q'" just to make sure no one thinks I'm crazy.
- lizardking 3mo agoLiterally everybody else is doing that too