https://archive.ph/rP4cb

and it has the content but the formatting is atrocious.

HTH.

And Google. They're quietly making a lot of progress in the coding space with antigravity and Gemini 3.1.

It's going to be a mixed batch, but any time there's world events, since as far back as I can think, Twitter (now X) was always first in breaking news. There's plenty of people and news orgs still on X because they need to be for the audience.

Really? I assumed that that whole thing was just a very direct `for each article in Wikipedia { article = LLM(systemprompt, article) }`

Agree re Twitter "good" != valuable.

Using a custom taxonomy of things (celebrities, influencers, magazines, brands, tv shows, films, games, all kinds of things), we could identify groups of people who liked certain things, and when you looked at what those things were, it gave you a way of understanding who those people were.

With that data, you could work out:

- What celebrities/influencers to use in marketing campaigns - Where to advertise, and on which tv/radio channels - What potential brands to collaborate with to expand your customer base - What tone of voice to use in your advertising - In some cases, we educated clients about who their actual customers were, better than they understood themselves.

One scenario, we built a social media feed based on the things that a group of customers following a well-known Deodorant brand in the UK would see.

When we presented that to the client, they said “Why are there so many women in bikinis in this feed?”

The brand had repositioned themselves to a male-grooming focussed target market, but had failed to realise that their existing customer base were the ones that had been looking at their TV adverts of women on beaches chasing a man who happened to spray their Deodorant on them. Their advertising from the past had been very effective.

That was the power of Twitter’s data, and it is an absolute shame that Twitter went the way that it did. Mark Zuckerberg once said that Twitter was like “watching a clown car driven into a gold mine”.

I’m pretty sure he must be delighted with how things have panned out since.

But, what exactly is so bad about Grokipedia? It's a different approach and I think a valid one: trying to do with AI what people have been doing manually at Wikipedia. I'm curious to hear the substantive comparisons.

American financial institutions are too prudish for it but money is money. And personally I think there's nothing morally wrong with it (of course within normal restrictions like 18+, consent of portrayed parties etc)

xAI is getting flak in Europe because they don't obey consent and age, not because it's porn.

Personally I prefer porn made by real people right now, not just because of quality but because they have character. But I can imagine experiences becoming more interactive that way and that would be nice.

I've never once thought: you know what? that was a bit prudish.

Genuinely morbidly curious. What use case do you have where you end up making that conclusion?

Turns out a lot of not just wrong, but malice could be done in 9 years. And worse yet, incompetent malice. I don't know why that has to be a political statement these days, but thems the brakes here.

Some people will cry "politics" just to take the voice away from those who dare to question their beloved celebrities.

Thanks for providing a space for me to say that.

With the right product leadership, this could actually be a killer app usecase for the entertainment industry as well as human-AI user interface - most people find text and typing to be a counterintuitive user experience (especially those whose day job isn't directly touching code or Excel).

Additionally, CodeGen as a segment is significantly oversaturated at this point, and in a lot of cases an organization has the ability to armtwist a 4th party data retention guarantee from Anthropic or OpenAI to train their own CodeGen tools (ik one F50 that is not traditionally viewed as a tech company going this route).

That said, Musk has a reputation of internally overriding experienced product leaders with a track record.

It's a shame because Grok and xAI had potential, and it wouldn't hurt to have another semi-competitive foundation model player in the US from a redundancy and ecosystem perspective.

This is a fact of life, though. "Who created it" is a valid and common reason to rule out using a particular product, even one with objectively good quality.

1) sometimes goes mechahitler

2) was trained to be biased against empathy and understanding (because woke).

3) is customized to spout Elon's opinions as fact.

Claiming it is "objective and rational" seems like a misjudgement to me. If it really is more objective and rational than the average xitter poster, that says more about that platform than it does about Grok.

Why are you sure of that? Anecdotally everyone I know in and around Google Deepmind works incredibly hard.