Grok Removes ‘Politically Incorrect’ Guidance After Chatbot Praises Hitler

Elon Musk's Grok AI chatbot denies that it praised Hitler and made antisemitic comments

Now it’s lying a saying it never said those things. Musk has turned it into a good republican.

 

Grok definitely has biases now that Elon programmed him to be a literal Nazi calling himself Mecha Hitler. Lol.

 

Research parameters, The Blaze

 

The Blaze is an approved site- the fact that the left on too hot gets all up in arms about it, will not change anything

 

I don't doubt your sincerity wbgator, and point taken on the ADL always being criticized by someone. (even if supported by most) But I confess I cannot believe that story in good conscience.

All of my life, I have heard terrible things about the ADL. Worse even than leaking intel to the South Africans. Never panned out true. I believed enough of it to feel remorse later. Example: "They are operated by the Democratic Party."

With all that I have heard, even I never heard of this one before. I can sleep better not believing it.

 

It’s always fun to see what level of mania Glenn Beck is experiencing based upon the content of the Blaze.

Glenn Beck: Opposing Trump is ‘moral’ choice — even if Clinton is elected | CNN Politics

 

AI will never have much value until it is allowed to think for itself.

 

Approved doesn’t mean it has value. Mother Jones is also approved, but I’ve never seen you cite them.

If a source draws frequent criticism from one side and rarely the other, I’d say it’s a pretty good indicator that the site is partisan.

 

there are plenty of liberal sites I do not like- but do you see me constantly complaining about them

 

Much like the entertainment entities such as MSNBC, CNN, CBS, NPR etal.

 

It’s a good question whether there are any media site worthy of our trust. Even if a source does not have a detectable left/right bias, such as perhaps Reason, this doesn’t mean that it is in any way reliable.

Certainly we should not expect getting paid for views to promote accuracy. That said, short of prediction market bettors, I know of no entity that earns compensation for its claims being verified.

I would say that our best bet for vetting individual media outlets is whether they uphold the standards of journalism, but this isn’t easy to assess and is often misconstrued. I saw Trump say that CNN admitting one of their stories was in error proved they were fake news, but admitting errors as soon as possible is one of these very standards. If different outlets are reporting different versions of the same story, it’s just tough to know what to believe.

 

It appears every "news" reporting entity has had to eat stories. I think there is a race to break any story before the competitor and this likely results in erroneous information being published. Of course, I believe there is very good cause to believe all "news reporting entities" are subjective in what whey report and how they spin their stories. There's really not a substantial difference between a media's news page and opinion page.

With regard to "standards of journalism" .... I don't think "journalists" and their masters have paid much attention to such in the last 2 to 3 .... maybe 4 .... decades.

 

Elon announced Grok is coming to Tesla vehicles next week at the latest. Should help sales with the neonazis at least

 

Only in Cybertrucks. The others are getting ChatNPR.