Grokipedia.com version 0.1 is now live. Efforts to replace wikipedia with a less biased root source for the world.

you’ll learn your lesson in time. Brainwashed cultist. He still doesn’t give a flying f**k about you and he never will. He’ll be happy to see bloodshed whilst they laugh their their heads at the stupidity of people like you who think they care. Also I’m a political atheist but I’d rather be socialist than an elite bootlicker

And yes I have watched Musk go from free speech champion to censor, just as the left did before him. The tendency for this to happen would seem to be a classic example of the corruption of power.

Fair. I was thinking about PPs who put a lot of weight on the contributary model and the transparency of comments and history as a counterbalance to bias.

The link I posted (which is I admit a long read) shows how in reality this can devolve from "the best evidenced and least biased content will be the content that endures" to a war of attrition where the content of the person most determined to win and best at manipulating the administrative mechanisms behind the content is what endures.

The burden is on the person who makes a claim to support that claim. This is Grownup Debating 101.

Joe Rogan's interview with Mark Zuckerberg was also an eye-opener. Predictably, it was misrepresented by the "liberal" media as sexism when it really wasn't at all.

I haven't seen anyone say that Wikipedia is unbiased. We all know it is but that doesn't mean Grok will be improvement. Elon Musk is extremely biased and has taken grok down for reprogramming several times because he didn't like answers it gave

No one on the thread has said that Wikipedia is unbiased.

Oh dear. I’ve given you the tools. It’s up to you what you do with them.

I do hope the people asserting that Wikipedia is unbiased took the time to read the link I posted. I would be very interested to hear their thoughts.

Indeed, I'd go so far as to say anyone now posting in this thread about WP's impartiality and lack of bias without explicitly referring to the content I posted and explaining why they do not think it undermines their position has burned any possibility of their posts being taken credibly.

It's "somewhat challenging" to provide a quote of content that isn't there (civil case against E. Jean Carroll) but should be.

Ick. Elon.

Ive given you a few examples, and you know where the source is. You started this thread about the source. All you need to do is type ‘Donald Trump’.

You could try reading it yourself? It’s basically the entire entry. One glaring example is the rape civil suit with E. Jean Carroll: not mentioned. Another: January 6 is reimagined as a peaceful day out that Trump had nothing to do with.

You imply that "left-leaning" is synonymous with "not racist" which is just wishful thinking.

Commenting now on other issues raised by PP.

IMHO Wikipedia "Talk Pages" are invaluable and will be a huge loss if and when WP dies. They are not only very revealing of the way WP is manipulated by authoritarian political activists and Editors with vested interests but they often provide interesting alternative takes and references that never make it into the Article.

Grokipedia is more "inclusive" than Wikipedia.

Less than 15% of WP Editors are women but even that is an over-estimate as so many of the "women" WP Editors are actually men, certainly all the "women" who have an iron grip on all the articles covering Feminism and Women's Rights.

For example, "Sceptre", variously identifying as a "lesbian transperson" and "non-binary dyke" from Leeds with a Masters in Mathematics, who was responsible for altering a WP article's title from the more neutral "Muslim grooming gangs in the United Kingdom" to "Grooming gang moral panic in the United Kingdom" and editing the article to reflect this propaganda.

This was eventually changed following outrage in the national and international press. This is an archived copy of the offending article:

archive.ph/JcvBS

IMHO this is also a good example of the moral depravity of some experienced, influential WP Editors.

WP is also notoriously systemically misogynistic and sexist, as evidenced by the difficulty getting articles about notable women approved and the speed with which they are subsequently deleted.

Technically, Wikipedia is a nightmare to edit and the rules are extremely hard to navigate. The misogynistic attitudes of the men involved with feminism and women's rights articles also make WP an unfriendly place for any woman who can spare the time and energy and has the skills to contribute.

I have used Grok to speed up producing information in support the above claims. If anyone wishes to dispute its accuracy, feel free:

https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtNQ%3D%3D_20bac3ec-5f84-40a7-ac1a-ab194201ab3e

As far as Grokipedia is concerned, it is very easy to submit corrections to articles but too soon to know how effective this system is and how resistant to vandalisation.

You only have to read Grokipedia’s fawning entry on Donald Trump to recognise where its bias lies.

Try not distorting and manipulating the facts. JK replies to MRAs/TRAs that harass her. They harass her first. If they don't like their abuse of her being made public, they shouldn't do it. You are saying the victim is wrong for calling it out.

By recommending women kick/punch in the balls a male who is harassing them, GL merely advocated self defence that every good self defence class advocates.

Elon 'cares' in the same way that Donald Trump 'has friends'.

Delightful sarcasm