6 Comments
User's avatar
Suman Suhag's avatar

If Grokipedia sustains growth, it could mark the first serious challenge to Wikipedia’s dominance in two decades. But the deeper story is about control of knowledge: who gets to define neutrality, and whether a platform born from Musk’s ecosystem can truly become the world’s reference library.

This isn’t just about traffic. it’s about whether the future of collective knowledge will be crowdsourced, corporate, or something in between.

Ray-SoCa's avatar

I wonder the impact on grokipedia about the tendency of AI to occasionally hallucinate.

Of course Wikipedia has the continual issue of a leftist bias, that sometimes deliberately lies.

Infogalactic, if I remember correctly, was going to show information with an option to show different views. From a conservative, leftist, etc prospective.

ApexCoderBahamut's avatar

This sounds like Scifi! But I think it would be even better if all the different AI's cooperated in making a "consesus wikipedia". That way neither Elon, Liang, Dario or Sam would get unproportional influence over its contents.

Edit: Maybe not in the near future. There is new ressearch that say's most LLM's can be statistically proven to greatly undervalue white people versus other phenotypes.

Vox Day's avatar

This is a real game-changer. I still suspect Infogalactic will be necessary, although obviously we'll use a similar approach to updating the various pages since it was never possible to get sufficient editors active on it.

Filip L's avatar

How should we cross reference, an issue is if all is AI powered it will be easy to manipulate and be arbitrator of truth. Books will be more important to actually see what is written in history

The Gray Man's avatar

Licensing books is part of why Grok isn't able to cite them yet