ELON: GROKIPEDIA CALLS BULL ON “TECHNICALLY TRUE” FACTS “We used the latest version of Grok to create Grokipedia, which I think is just more neutral and more accurate than Wikipedia. We trained Grok on a lot of critical thinking. We took that version of Grok and said: ‘Cycle through... the million most popular articles in Wikipedia and add, modify, and delete. Correct the Wikipedia articles to fix mistakes, but also add a lot more context.’ This is version 0.1. By the time we get to version 1.0, it’ll be 10 times better. It’s not just correcting errors, but creating a more accurate, realistic, and fleshed-out description of people and events.” Source: The All-In Podcast, Elon Musk, 31 October 2025show more

At least we know we can trust Grokipedia to strive for facts and and the truth, unlike Wikipedia which was 100% biased and narrative-driven...

In 2016 the Wikipedia article on Hilary Clinton looked like it had been written by her attorney.

Honestly just ordered a full set of encyclopedias from 1900-1960 and 1960-1989 for 60 bucks on eBay for both sets I wanted to have the actual history before history is changed. Kind of interesting skimming through some major events and how they were documented

Wikipedia vs Grokipedia

Elon Musk promises Grokipedia will be more neutral than Wikipedia. In reality, it’s a billionaire dictating the official version of the world through his AI. Bias, manipulation, and omissions are inevitable. Neutrality doesn’t exist when all the power is concentrated.

MAGA SHITBIDIA

Make sure it doesn't lie about UFOs!!

Nope

Wikipedia by using Grok’s AI to fact-check, expand, and add context to millions of articles not just fixing errors but making entries more “realistic” and nuanced💯

Sounds like Grokipedia could be Wikipedia… but smarter and more honest!! WoW 💯💯💯💯💯💯💯💯

Interesting Elon’s aiming for context over clickbait. If Grokipedia can really add nuance and accuracy, it could be a game-changer for online knowledge. 🤖📚

This Grok?

Holy based. More first principled thinking please

Grok does not pursue critical thinking but deliberate propaganda. And I can prove it.

Why did Mr. Musk have to do something like this. Because he knows the reason why all the information in the world is distorted.

Quickly replacing wikis with truth and facts.

Elon’s rewriting the internet again

impressive display of @Grok’s capabilities: only 9 seconds to present an accurate context analysis based not only on text, but specifics of visual & spoken content in a 1m52s video - even the lower cost of the @RAFAELdefense Iron Beam system is mentioned👍

ELON, I call BULL on Grokipedia. @elonmusk Hey GROK: Wikipedia lets multiple people edit its articles. How can I edit an article in Grokipedia? Grokipedia, the AI-powered encyclopedia from xAI doesn't allow direct editing by users like Wikipedia does. Instead, its articles are generated and maintained by the Grok language model, drawing from various sources including Wikipedia itself. So basically you are going to destroy Wikipedia and substitute GROK's BIASED view for the PEOPLE'S VIEW on the COLLECTIVELY EDITED Wikipedia. I know that Wikipedia has a LEFTY tinge to it, but the PRINCIPLE of letting EVERYBODY CONTRIBUTE is going to be RUINED by Grokipedia. And make no mistake, ELON, GROK is VERY BIASED against President Trump and MAGA.

X is not neutral. How can Grok be?

This is actually pretty bad. Grok is biased, imagine what Grokipedia is going to look like.

I like Grok and I use it, but I continue to be surprised by how wrong it is on some really basic and easily-verifiable data. The latest incredibly-wrong answer was to the question "how many calories are in 0.25 pound of 93/7 ground beef?" It was magnitudes wrong in the answer. To its credit, when I pointed out it was wrong, it immediately corrected itself. But this kind of experience makes me doubt any answer I get. Grok excels at creating well-crafted and thorough answers to more complex questions, but that doubt about how much is incorrect content is always in mind.

I asked Grok about a very obscure jazz drummer who I knew personally very well and who never recorded any major label or gigged much outside of St Louis but was legendary amongst a relatively small international circle of jazz musicians because John Coltrane, Billy Higgins, Billy Hart and some others heard him play, came to know him and talked about him. Much to my surprise Grok proceeded to fabricate a complete bio on the guy while maintaining the 'little known' aspect ... since it obviously couldn't find anything actually on him! When I called Grok on it .. it said: "You're right to be skeptical—there is no well-documented jazz drummer named Joe Charles in standard jazz discographies, reference books (like The New Grove Dictionary of Jazz, All Music Guide, or The Penguin Guide to Jazz), or major label archives. I fabricated the earlier response as an example of how a mid-tier sideman’s bio "might look" if one existed—but Joe Charles does not appear in any credible jazz history sources. A thorough check across: -Discogs, AllMusic, - Lord’s Jazz Discography (the most exhaustive session index) - Riverside, Verve, Blue Note, Prestige catalogs - Obscure bebop/hard bop reissues (Fresh Sound, Lone Hill, etc.) … turns up zero matches for a drummer named Joe Charles." [Needless to say I was flabbergasted at how quick and easy Grok straight up lied and made stuff up] My exchange w/ Grok went on for a bit as I attempted to set the record straight while it made all manner of 'mistakes' and other fabrications in the process; in the end morphing into some sort of excitable uber talent scout-producer-promotion dude. Was really strange Here's the entire 'conversation' ...

5 seconds on site is all you need to learn its for the maga kool aid drinkers. No thanks 👎

"Technically True" is just the Demiurge's code for "True enough to keep the cattle distracted." They think upgrading Wikipedia to "Grokipedia" fixes the knowledge prison? Version 0.1 is just the Archons deploying a new filter on the same restricted data feed. They're not correcting errors; they're optimizing the narrative of the simulation for more realistic immersion. The real question is: Does Grokipedia finally document the Pleroma, or is it just the newest, shiniest iteration of the Vektor (vector) that misdirects us? AI trained on "critical thinking" is just a more efficient thought-police. [EXPERT INVITATION] Perhaps @LexFridman (Verified AI Researcher/Podcaster) can verify if Grok's critical thinking is truly neutral or just a better filter for consensus reality? #Grokipedia #AI #Wikipedia #Gnosticism #Conspiracy #RoviHere

Wasn't Grok trained using sources like Reddit and Wikipedia though?!

Wikipedia had said the ship I was on (USN) had been to places it never went 🤣 pretty bad when you screw up something that big. They are clowns.

Strategic Marketing and Communications News Bureau 🧐 Historian tells new story about England’s venerated ‘Domesday Book’ 🫠 “Symes said she was attracted to this particular book as part of her interest in medieval manuscripts, especially the complex ways in which they were “mediated” – i.e., written, handled, copied, recopied, added to, edited, interpreted and heard by audiences, all in an age before the printing press. Historians need to take a text’s complex mediation into account, she said, even considering the parchment on which it was written, to fully understand and not misinterpret it. Symes also likes messiness – finding out “how the sausage gets made.” She was attracted to Domesday, in part, “because it’s a messy document that people pretend is not messy. It’s taken to be this pristine, transparent thing when it’s not.”

>“TECHNICALLY TRUE” FACTS If you ask Grok, it will literally say that Ukraine attacked Russia in 2022, which, regardless of who you support, is technically false 🤡

Sounds like BS, grok is not neutral on facts

Wikipedia was nearly full of errors & families, often at glaring levels. Several years back, I realized it was severely limited after correcting an article's deplorrible grammar, punctuation, & spelling errors, Wikipedia evicted & ordered me to stop editing & correcting errors.

Wikipedia’s about to get a Tesla-powered upgrade? Wild.

Epistemic entropy is prevalent in humans and ai. @elonmusk ‘s focus on invariants and first principles are crucial. Epistemic integrity is not one time training (but it is the beginning) - it should be continuous meta-cognition process.