I suspected a connection between the name “Grokipedia” and Elmo’s AI, but it would have been nice for someone to actually explain that Elmo had launched a fake Wiki site. I still don’t know anything more about it except that Elmo is apparently behind it.
Your incessant hostility across this board says a lot more about you than about any of those you choose to dump on. What the fuck is wrong with you, man? Is the world just not to your liking? You seem perpetually angry. Did you have an abusive childhood, or what?
It would be nice if the people who weren’t interested in a post just ignored it, rather than taking it as an invitation to climb up on their soap box and tell the rest of us about their disapproval over others’ posting styles.
And this goes triple for the “I don’t want to watch a video, and will make sure you all know every… single… time…” posters.
Indeed, and funnily enough, you can even see how much engagement they got. Which was virtually none. The most any link has been clicked was 6 times, most got 1. Want to know my guess for why almost no one actually read the articles despite this enormous side detour into posting style and throwing insults at one another? Because @yendis took the ten seconds to quote an objectionable part from the cite and explain why it was objectionable. That, and if you’re so disinterested in actually making your point that you can’t be bothered to do more than write one sentence followed by a bunch of links with no explanation whatsoever, most people aren’t going to be any more interested in the point than the initial poster and won’t bother actually clicking on the link.
This is a great article about Tesla accidents, the company’s deeply ingrained culture of secrecy, and Elmo’s lies about how Tesla will always release all available data pertaining to an accident. In fact, in the cases cited in this investigative report, they released nothing and the investigative team had great difficulty getting anyone at Tesla to talk to them.
That’s a very mild critique of Grokipedia, basically just saying that it’s unreliable because the content is AI-generated, and Wikipedia is much more reliable.
Quite the understatement considering the raging racism in Grokipedia and undoubtedly equally toxic articles on other sociopolitical subjects reflecting Elmo’s unhinged world-view.
I briefly looked at one of the articles previously linked, which was blatantly promoting scientific racism. The question that I’d have loved to be able to ask Elmo isn’t so much about all the stats he was deluging us with – it’s not hard to get statistics to “prove” just about anything you want by introducing unacknowledged confounding factors, cherry-picking data, or just misapplying statistical methods.
But Elmo seems to really, really want to convince us that Blacks are intellectually inferior to whites, and my question would be, Elmo, why are you working so hard on this? Just exactly what do you want us to do with this information that you’re so relentlessly promoting? If your objective is a more peaceful, just, and egalitarian society, you’re definitely doing it wrong!
Sure, but I’m just wondering what end goal he has in mind. The only thing I’d imagine he might be satisfied with is the old South African system of Apartheid introduced in the USA, and maybe not even then. Hate speech typically has some end-goal. What is Elmo’s?
Having used Wikipedia for a while now, I feel reasonably sure that its biases are not “liberal,” they’re “pedantic,” as in, the sort of person who spends a lot of time creating/editing Wikipedia articles is less interested in shoving a political viewpoint into the articles there than they are in demanding every little fact presented has verifiable third party support.
I can say with great authority that this is 100% spot on.
Fuckhead.