Hacker News Reader

Comment by ransom1538 | Hacker News Reader

[flagged]

Grok has a serious credibility problem due to Elon’s decisions and personal insanity.

Will it ever recover? Maybe. But it’s got an uphill battle even compared to the Chinese models, and that’s saying something.

Wait until you find out who owns the other models

Did they kill hundreds of thousands of poor people by shutting down USAID too?

No it was more. In Brazil, 4 billion people died -- just one night without poetry jams.

Sure, let’s make jokes about the poor dying of malaria and AIDS. You sound like a Grok power user.

Lol. I thought you were joking too! But you sound like a Gemini Power user!

No you didn’t, and that’s not much of an insult.

I'm curious, is this true or something you heard from MSM and regurgitated?

> Forecasting models predicted that the current steep funding cuts could result in more than 14 051 750 (uncertainty interval 8 475 990–19 662 191) additional all-age deaths, including 4 537 157 (3 124 796–5 910 791) in children younger than age 5 years, by 2030.

https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140-6736(25)01186-9/full...

So for comparison, Pol Pot only killed 3 million people in total according to upper bound estimates.

As opposed to what? Going down to Africa to count the bodies myself?

Of course I read about it in the media. And there are articles from Harvard, UCLA, and others that say the same thing

Former beneficiaries of USAID funds created some studies you say?

Yup, the destitute and dying are famous for their highly publicized research.

Tell me you don't know how science works without telling me that you don't know how science works.

So you think a malaria prevention program can be canceled without notice and no one will die from that?

The only people who believe that do not believe in anything. They think there is no such thing as competence or honesty because they have never experienced it.

That's not true. I believe firmly the American taxpayer and government is responsible for the lives of every single person in the world.

We were responsible for providing notice and a transition period when we stopped paying for it. We didn't have to pay for it, and they didn't have to die. But we have an administration that can't plan a pool party.

The mainstream media is Fox News, so probably not.

They've only been billionaires for a couple years. These things take time.

Should I pick a model a) run by a lying crypto bro once obsessed with scanning eyeballs b) that costs too much and resulted bombing innocent kids c) that is cheap but ultimately owned by re-education camp operators d) something else

We have three major foundational models not including Grok.

When the defense for a company is basically “yeah they host csam in the platform but is that really worse than the others” you’ve really lost the plot

We could just not have AI models that generate CSAM I don't think that's too much to ask

Plenty of competitive open weight models

> Yes. We only need one AI company. Max two. Good idea.

Nothing in the original comment suggested that fewer AI companies was inherently a good thing - just that this _particular_ AI company is a bad one.

> Deciding who is more moral has a great history.

I think you're being sarcastic, but, uhhh...are you honestly advocating for the converse, of making no judgements based on morals?

xAI's (unused) dedicated compute is being sold for Anthropic's inference.

xAI isn't a frontier company, and their fate is already being decided by the two hegemons.

I am inclined to agree but grok 4.5 seems to be almost SOTA. They could be frontier soon.

Competition is good, but this company and its owner have not demonstrated anything to indicate that they would make for good competition, neither economically nor morally.

Also, yes, a company whose products produce CSAM is just morally bad. There's no nuance to be had there.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com