Elon Musk briefly launches a Wikipedia rival that extols his own 'vision'
Source: Washington Post
Elon Musk on Monday launched an early version of Grokipedia, an online encyclopedia written by AI, only for the site to stop working soon after.
-snip-
When it first went live Monday afternoon, the site resembled Wikipedia in style and format, with articles on topics such as ChatGPT, Diane Keaton and the 2026 FIFA World Cup. But it appeared significantly smaller, more opaque in its workings and more right-leaning in how it framed some articles.
-snip-
Musks own Grokipedia entry differed strikingly from the Wikipedia page on the same subject. It described some of his pursuits in breathless terms, saying his pushes for artificial intelligence emphasize AI safety through truth-oriented development rather than heavy regulation and that certain releases releases reflect xAIs rapid iteration, with Musk highlighting Groks design for maximal truth-seeking and reduced censorship, citing xAIs own website to make that point.
-snip-
Every major AI system trains on Wikipedias freely licensed knowledge, said Stephen Harrison, a journalist and author who has covered Wikipedia extensively, on Friday. The irony is that Grokipedia will be built on the unpaid labor of the volunteer Wikipedia editors Musk has gone out of his way to vilify.
-snip-
Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2025/10/27/grokipedia-wikipedia-musk-/
Musk is so pathetic.
TygrBright
(21,241 posts)mdbl
(7,651 posts)I really like Wikipedia. I definitely don't trust anything by Eloon Skum.
peppertree
(23,005 posts)More or less dominated by neo-con operatives and their POV-pushing allies when it comes to a number of foreign policy-related articles - on the Israeli occupation and vulture fund heists, for instance (I, for one, never touch the former).
But, of course, to a Hitler-smooching fascist like Muskrat, anything to the middle of Third Reich dogma is "far-left/communist."
Buddyzbuddy
(1,774 posts)RedWhiteBlueIsRacist
(1,402 posts)Marie Marie
(10,661 posts)His promises are just like Trump's "in 2 weeks" BS. Neither ever happen - at least not with any quality or reliability.
Mr. Sparkle
(3,531 posts)It's a sick disease
maxsolomon
(37,707 posts)RW Media is a 40-year project. It's turned the American public against Liberalism and the Democratic Party.
Dem4life1970
(1,000 posts)He screwed up X, destroyed Tesla, made SpaceX a punchline, and DOGE (don't get me started). He is a rich kid who has "failed up" like his former buddy, President Epstein.
Aussie105
(7,335 posts)Asked "Is Musk insane?'
Ended up staring at a blank screen.
Not what I was promised!
"Discover comprehensive, AI-generated articles on any topic. Ask anything, and Grokipedia will create a detailed, well-researched article instantly."
JohnnyRingo
(20,255 posts)Add AI and anyone can decide what's real and what's not. Who will write your "news" for you?
Tanuki
(16,146 posts)..."In an online landscape characterised by doom and division, it stands out: a huge, collective endeavour based on voluntarism and cooperation, with an underlying vision thats unapologetically utopian to build a world where every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. It has weathered teething troubles (such as a joke edit that suggested a loyal aide to Robert F Kennedy was in fact involved in his and his brothers assassinations) to become a place in which civility and neutrality are the guiding stars, and levels of accuracy match those of academic textbooks.
Waless new book, The Seven Rules of Trust, is an attempt to distil the secrets of its success. They include things such as having a strong, clear, positive purpose (the slogan Wikipedia is an encyclopedia is a surprisingly powerful reminder that keeps editors honest); assuming good faith and being courteous; refraining from taking sides and being radically transparent. Its a no-nonsense lessons learned book that might otherwise find itself occupying shelf space next to Steven Bartletts Diary of a CEO (subtitle: The 33 Laws of Business and Life) but Wikipedias ubiquity, and the way it has dramatically bucked the trend of online toxicity make it potentially far more significant.
....
Not everyone is convinced. On the day I meet Wales, Musk suggests to his 228 million followers on X that Wikipedia should be called Wokipedia (or Dickipedia 😂
Musks hostility aside, does Wales see artificial intelligence in general as a threat? If people are increasingly relying on AI summaries, might Wikipedias dominance turn out to have been a blip? I dont think so, he says, but, I mean, thats obviously on a lot of peoples minds these days. It would be ironic, given that the sites free licensing model means it can be used by anyone for anything including as training data for large language models. There are definitely threats to the web, but theyre not necessarily coming from AI, he says. I think the bigger threat is the rise of authoritarianism, governments, regulations, which make it harder to have a truly open global web where people are free to share ideas. Its true that Wikipedia is blocked in China, and faces sporadic censorship in Russia and elsewhere. Waless stance on this is not to give an inch he has said: We have a very firm policy, never breached, to never cooperate with government censorship in any region of the world.....(more)
jfz9580m
(16,002 posts)When my moms cancer got rapidly worse when she went off Metformin the second time, I needed info and fast on Metformin and multiple myeloma. This was 2021 and by then I was already worried that even pubmed (a usually reliable source) might one day get clogged with junk.
People talk about the net as if it is just social media. But thats not the stuff that one worries about. If actual scientific resources..
Well hopefully that doesnt happen.
It would be a disaster if PubMed or hyper physics or univ websites..
It happened to a pdf of file of mine around Jan 2022? Cant recall exactly. It was just a physics handout on tension I had downloaded.
It had been corrupted and turned into what looked like junk. I wish I had kept it.
Imagine if that happened to pdfs on pubmed. That would not be good for scientific research.
And with NIST etc gone..
Well..I dont know..damn Idiocracy..