• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    89
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Elon Musk has launched an online encyclopedia named Grokipedia that he said relied on artificial intelligence and would align more with his rightwing views than Wikipedia, though many of its articles say they are based on Wikipedia itself.

    Calling an AI encyclopedia “super important for civilization”, Musk had been planning the Wikipedia rival for at least a month. Grokipedia does not have human authors, unlike Wikipedia, which is written and edited by volunteers in a transparent process. Grokipedia said it is “fact-checked” by Grok, Musk’s AI chatbot

    Sounds like he told Grok to “rephrase” Wikipedia, then tells it to edit random shit so that it agrees with his views.

    I’d bet if you looked up a random neutral topic, there’d be a clear case for plagiarism straight from Wikipedia.

    • Pennomi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      42
      ·
      16 hours ago

      IIRC, Wikipedia is CC-BY-SA licensed, generally it’s okay to take, remix, and publish its content, no matter whether you’re using it for good or evil. You just have to Share Alike the results.

      But asking a known biased bullshit generator to fact check things is pretty cringe in general.

      • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        15 hours ago

        I wonder if its a one-time fork, or if Musk wants to continue to derive benefit from Wikipedia authors and editors. Is it possible its actually a real-time AI filtering each request? If so that would burn up a massive amount of AI tokens.

        It would also present some great methods to tease out exactly how his filters are working. Assuming its real-time, a single wikipedia page could be created with test content with specific words or phrases then a check on the grok version to see if it alters it. A full map could be built of exactly the rules its using.

        • LOGIC💣@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          14 hours ago

          It can’t be a one time fork. Whenever his propaganda changes, he’s going to want to give different instructions to his AI and then regenerate the entire encyclopedia like he already did.

          It’s a different use case from an encyclopedia that is based on facts and the truth.

      • porcoesphino@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Its a shame there is no license that forbids AI use. Well, there kind of are but none are common and probably wouldn’t hold up in court. Still, it would be nice to attach to work and communicate that the preference is to not have AI reuse

        • Pennomi@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 hours ago

          AI is predominantly classified as “fair use” in the US right now, so it wouldn’t even matter if you said “No AI” - copyright does not apply.

          • porcoesphino@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 hours ago

            That’s what I meant by “wouldn’t hold up in court”. Thanks for filling in the specifics. I wish it wasn’t classified as fair us, I think its an unfortunate way to avoid paying people for training data and that’s hiding the true cost of the system