Nika

Do you think Grokipedia has a real chance to succeed and surpass Wikipedia?

Elon Musk was extremely frustrated that Wikipedia couldn’t be manipulated, and he even offered $1 billion if they renamed it to “d*ckipedia.”

Since that didn’t work out, he’s now trying to build his own platform for gathering information – claiming that Wikipedia is “hopelessly biased,” and that left-leaning editors influence its content.

Do you think creating Grokipedia makes sense, especially considering how much Elon Musk seems to want control over information? What's your opinion on this?

I've heard that a lot of people turn to Grok for information, and I personally use Grok, but I don't really like the person behind it, who has quite strange opinions and a way of expressing himself.

606 views

Add a comment

Replies

Best
Pankaj Ahuja
I did have a pet project about Wikipedia. Maybe I could pitch my services haha. I should’ve or could access the sources and verify Wikipedia’s information. Maybe make a truly verified Wikipedia. Many of their sources are dead or lead to nowhere.
Nika

@wikicrawl Do you mean WikiCrawl? :D

Pankaj Ahuja

@busmark_w_nika yeah, I mean it's been dead in the water since AI but if theres any demand for fact checking wikipedia articles. could get into it.

Mac Divine

i don't think people really tun to wikipedia as their major source of information these days. but i don't think grokpedia would be any different too.

Konrad S.
@mac_divine I certainly use Wikipedia as major information source. I think if one wants reliable and comprehensive information, it's still the best by far for most topics.
Chris Messina

@mac_divine LLMs do.

Nika

@mac_divine I still use Wikipedia and many LLMs too. (besides Reddit)

Konrad S.

Didn't find info about how it's supposed to work exactly, so let's wait and see.

However, I certainly don't trust Elon to build an objective source of information...

Nika

@konrad_sx He is not certainly objective, especially supporting one specific party during elections.

Abdul Rehman

So… we’re moving from free editing to freedom of Elon?

Nika

@abod_rehman Looks like that :D

Shihang
Wikipedia has community and volunteers to maintain lots of articles. Not sure how Grok can match those human efforts.
Nika

@shihangw Grok will be biased only towards information that Elon wants to be in aether.

Shihang
@busmark_w_nika He really tried. Turns out it’s surprisingly hard to make a model that’s smart enough to ace benchmarks yet dishonest enough to lie on purpose.
cristiana couceiro

This might be a bit difficult.

Nika

@new_user_730378091d They already rolled out so I will be watching closely the outcome.

Ashok Nayak

I believe Grokipedia is unnecessary. Waste of his money maybe because we no longer have research-oriented writers like the earlier days. Now there's barely anyone who visits a library, reads a thesis/journal, and comes back to write on Wiki.

@busmark_w_nika, but I agree with Elon's take on Wikipedia...(not the renaming part :D)

Biased platform, yes. And I say this because I was an editor there. Tough time...

Nika

@ashok_nayak Say, what was happening at Wikipedia :D open up :D

Ashok Nayak
@busmark_w_nika yeah, if I listen to your request, I might end up getting sued by Wikipedia for opening up here 😂 Please spare me, I am yet to live life 🥹
Nika

@ashok_nayak OK, so let's then keep it in secret :D

Chris Messina

It makes sense for Elon to do it because who controls the information controls the spice, and Elon wants all roads to go through his empire, just like Zuck.

It's a waste of time and resources from humanity's perspective though.

Nika

@chrismessina I think he (his money) is powerful enough to get what he wants.

Alex Cloudstar

Good question, Nika. Competition is fine, but surpassing Wikipedia is tough. I’d judge Grokipedia on open licensing, transparent edits, strong sourcing, independent governance, diverse editors. If those exist, trust can grow beyond the founder.

Nika

@alexcloudstar Grokipedia with independent governance (with Elon?) That's sci-fi. :D

Vlad

Maybe. The output would need to be grounded on human generated information/analysis (historical books, encyclopedias) to have any chance of exceeding quality of info on Wikipedia. The good news is that all the articles already cite their sources, so it'd be pretty straightforward to implement a "deep research" with those sources as the root.

Nika

@vsteppp True, so we need more data from written books and the history to outperform Wikipedia, but that's sounds quite sci-fi :D

12
Next
Last