I just hope that Grokipedia will be more reliable than Wikipedia. Fun fact: I used to edit and help write technical proposals for the faculty at a large research university in the South. Time after time a few faculty members would try to use Wikipedia as a source. Our policy at that time was to delete the reference and tell the faculty member that he/she would have to find a different and more reliable source before we could submit the proposal.
I always used to tell them, "Wikipedia is sort of like a bathroom fixture... you don't know who touched it last."
From the Wiki article - "Because of its high cost Novella described the diet as one for "select elites", adding what he said was a further unsavory aspect to its harmful and pseudoscientific basis."
Beef has went up in price due to the Biden Administration's war on cow farts leading to the lowest herd counts in 71 years, but it's still possible to eat relatively cheaply on this diet.
1 lb. of ground beef per day along with eggs and butter cost under $100 a week, at least here in Texas. Nobody has to eat ribeyes every day to be carnivore.
I checked and it is quite a good story. It even dives into the historical context, although it leaves the valuation of it to the reader, which I think is a good thing.
I would not claim there is no bias, but at least it gives a better view than Wikipedia, where one has to construct the story from several articles and references, to get a clear picture.
Why is WikiPEDOa allowed a monopoly on hijacking the first page of all search results, to label anything not aligned with Marx as 'far right disinformation conspiracy theorist domestic terrorism'?? What CUNT is paying for that? 🤬🤬🔥🔥
I used Grokipedia last night just as a test. It was still using CNN, Fox, MSN, liberal University "studies", etc as a major part of is sourcing. No thanks
wondering if this will be better, or even worse. I mean I obviously don't trust a gaggle of shitlibs to give me information, but not sure that I trust AI any more...
The new project, Grokipedia, would “purge out the propaganda” flooding Wikipedia, Mr. Musk claimed in a post on his social media site, X.
Grokipedia, which briefly crashed after its launch Monday afternoon, tallied more than 800,000 A.I.-generated encyclopedia entries, compared with Wikipedia’s nearly eight million human-written ones. Visitors to the website — grokipedia.com — were greeted with a bare-bones logo and a search bar that allowed them to query topics.
Wikipedia itself is not the issue. The issue is people believing everything they read (as long as it reinforces the opinions they already hold) without checking sources, and then not understanding what a credible source is.
Wikipedia can be beneficial as a place to source information on a subject. Just scroll down to the bottom to look at what the sources are for the article.
Then learn how to discern a credible source from an non-credible source. For instance, if it's a history article on WW2 for instance, a credible source could be non-fiction books, academic books written about it, or biographies of people who served in the war. A non-credible source would be something like "Jim Bob's Blog About Shit He Likes".
Truly, this is the problem:
Confirmation Bias
Not looking for sources
Not being able to differentiate a credible source from a non-credible one.
Doesn't matter of Musk does his version or not. Grok isn't infallible. I think we've all seen plenty of proof that Grok can get shit hugely wrong sometimes.
It's the fact that the majority of people just believe the parts that are convenient for them to believe, and toss out all the rest along with the lack of respect for credible sources. Musk and Grok aren't changing any of that.
I just hope that Grokipedia will be more reliable than Wikipedia. Fun fact: I used to edit and help write technical proposals for the faculty at a large research university in the South. Time after time a few faculty members would try to use Wikipedia as a source. Our policy at that time was to delete the reference and tell the faculty member that he/she would have to find a different and more reliable source before we could submit the proposal.
I always used to tell them, "Wikipedia is sort of like a bathroom fixture... you don't know who touched it last."
u/#kek
Looked up carnivore diet and Wikipedia claims it's pseudoscientific.
Big differences between these two entries.
https://grokipedia.com/page/Carnivore_diet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnivore_diet
Info vs hit-piece
From the Wiki article - "Because of its high cost Novella described the diet as one for "select elites", adding what he said was a further unsavory aspect to its harmful and pseudoscientific basis."
Beef has went up in price due to the Biden Administration's war on cow farts leading to the lowest herd counts in 71 years, but it's still possible to eat relatively cheaply on this diet.
1 lb. of ground beef per day along with eggs and butter cost under $100 a week, at least here in Texas. Nobody has to eat ribeyes every day to be carnivore.
Great point!
But....it can't really get much WORSE than wiki (commie-pedia).....LOL.....
https://grokipedia.com/page/Cabal
I checked and it is quite a good story. It even dives into the historical context, although it leaves the valuation of it to the reader, which I think is a good thing.
I would not claim there is no bias, but at least it gives a better view than Wikipedia, where one has to construct the story from several articles and references, to get a clear picture.
Not a bad improvement. But as always: DYOR!!!!
If the Wiki is edited by AI only, can users even give feedback? If so, how?
What if the AI obviously hallucinated something or got something wrong? How will that be corrected in a timely and accurate manner?
I have questions, but I am still interested.
https://grokipedia.com/
Thanks. Bookmarked.
Why is WikiPEDOa allowed a monopoly on hijacking the first page of all search results, to label anything not aligned with Marx as 'far right disinformation conspiracy theorist domestic terrorism'?? What CUNT is paying for that? 🤬🤬🔥🔥
I used Grokipedia last night just as a test. It was still using CNN, Fox, MSN, liberal University "studies", etc as a major part of is sourcing. No thanks
Give it a chance bud... 😉😏😁
I had to tell Grok AI to never use Snopes as a source.
Another "PortaPotapedia" ? 🤔😮🤨
wondering if this will be better, or even worse. I mean I obviously don't trust a gaggle of shitlibs to give me information, but not sure that I trust AI any more...
The new project, Grokipedia, would “purge out the propaganda” flooding Wikipedia, Mr. Musk claimed in a post on his social media site, X.
Grokipedia, which briefly crashed after its launch Monday afternoon, tallied more than 800,000 A.I.-generated encyclopedia entries, compared with Wikipedia’s nearly eight million human-written ones. Visitors to the website — grokipedia.com — were greeted with a bare-bones logo and a search bar that allowed them to query topics.
Is it going to lie to appease the user like AI has already been doing??
Wikipedia itself is not the issue. The issue is people believing everything they read (as long as it reinforces the opinions they already hold) without checking sources, and then not understanding what a credible source is.
Wikipedia can be beneficial as a place to source information on a subject. Just scroll down to the bottom to look at what the sources are for the article.
Then learn how to discern a credible source from an non-credible source. For instance, if it's a history article on WW2 for instance, a credible source could be non-fiction books, academic books written about it, or biographies of people who served in the war. A non-credible source would be something like "Jim Bob's Blog About Shit He Likes".
Truly, this is the problem:
Doesn't matter of Musk does his version or not. Grok isn't infallible. I think we've all seen plenty of proof that Grok can get shit hugely wrong sometimes.
It's the fact that the majority of people just believe the parts that are convenient for them to believe, and toss out all the rest along with the lack of respect for credible sources. Musk and Grok aren't changing any of that.
🤷♀️