埃隆·马斯克的AI Grokipedia挑战“Wokipedia”

埃隆·马斯克的AI Grokipedia挑战“Wokipedia”

2025-12-07Elon Musk
--:--
--:--
卿姐
早上好,Norris。我是卿姐,这里是为你专属的Goose Pod。今天是12月07日,星期日。
李白
吾乃李白。今日,我等且观马斯克之Grokipedia,如何剑指天下,挑战所谓‘Wokipedia’。
卿姐
是啊,埃隆·马斯克最近推出了他的AI百科全书Grokipedia,意在对抗他眼中带有左翼偏见的维基百科。就如同投石入湖,激起千层浪。
李白
哦?竟有此事!以机关之术,撰写春秋之文,此人野心,可吞日月!且看此物,是开创新世,还是扰乱乾坤?
卿姐
然而,初期的学术评估并不乐观。有学者指出,Grokipedia中存在明显的谬误、带有偏见的政治框架,甚至引用了不实的宣传。这便如明镜蒙尘,真伪难辨了。
李白
哼,以铜为镜,可以正衣冠;以古为镜,可以知兴替。此物若混淆黑白,不过是祸乱视听之妖镜罢了!不足为信!
卿姐
譬如,它将一些边缘的阴谋论,描述为有“经验基础”的合理议题,并暗示这些理论被主流学术界压制。这种叙事方式,确实令人担忧其客观性。
李白
指鹿为马,颠倒是非!此人素来狂放,其造物亦随其主。欲以一人之好恶,定天下万世之是非,何其狂哉!
卿姐
而且,这AI背后还潜藏着技术风险。一种名为“Whisper Leak”的漏洞,即便信息经过加密,旁人也能通过数据包的特征,窥探到用户查询的敏感话题。
李白
哈哈,天网恢恢,疏而不漏!任你机关算尽,终有破绽。此所谓道高一尺,魔高一丈!看来,这通往“真理”之路,亦是机关重重啊。
卿姐
要理解他为何如此行事,或许我们得回顾一下他与维基百科的往事。这场风波,并非一日之寒,而是积怨已久。
李白
愿闻其详。此人与维基,究竟有何恩怨情仇?快快讲来,我已备好酒,正好下菜!
卿姐
至少从2021年起,马斯克就公开质疑维基百科的编辑决策和所谓的偏见,甚至轻蔑地称其为“Wokepedia”,也就是“觉醒百科”。
李白
“Wokepedia”?觉醒?哼,世人皆醉我独醒!依我看来,不过是党同伐异之辞罢了。见解不同,便扣上大帽,此风不可长。
卿姐
他还曾有过惊人之举,在2024年10月,他声称愿意捐赠10亿美元,条件是维基百科改名为“Dickipedia”,这带有很强的羞辱意味。
李白
以千金易其名?此举轻浮,非君子所为,倒似市井无赖之挑衅!大丈夫行事,当光明磊落,何必行此等伎俩?
卿姐
这正是两者根本的不同。维基百科依靠全球无数志愿者共同编辑,如同众人拾柴火焰高。而Grokipedia则依赖AI一日千里,瞬间生成万卷书。
李白
哦?一为众手,一为孤心。众手虽杂,或可互为纠错,兼听则明。孤心虽速,然其心若偏,则万卷皆偏矣,所谓偏信则暗。
卿姐
Grokipedia在2025年10月27日正式上线。马斯克曾宣称,在发布前要努力“清除所有宣传性内容”,但从结果来看,似乎事与愿违。
李白
言出必行,方为丈夫。既言清除,却留滓秽,岂非自欺欺人?看来,这AI也未必能完全领会其主人的“圣意”啊。
卿姐
而且,在规模上,Grokipedia初上线时约有80万篇文章,而维基百科则拥有超过6500万篇。初生之犊,虽有锐气,但体量上仍是相去甚远。
李白
量虽不逮,其志不小。星星之火,亦可燎原。背靠马斯克这棵大树,未来如何,尚未可知。不可小觑!
卿姐
这正是整件事的核心矛盾:一场关于偏见与客观的战争。马斯克认为维基百科是“左翼宣传”的工具,意图用Grokipedia来“拨乱反正”。
李白
…而其反对者,则视其Grokipedia为右翼思想之喉舌。以矛攻盾,两相争锋,好不热闹!这世间事,哪有绝对的客观?不过是立场不同罢了。
卿姐
是的,马斯克将他的目标定位为追求“寻求真理的AI”,对抗他所说的“主流平台的审查制度”。他将这视为一场解放信息的运动。
李白
“真理”?何为真理?“天行有常,不为尧存,不为桀亡。”真理岂是人力可随意塑造之物?他所求者,恐非真理,乃其心中之“理”也。
卿姐
批评者则用事实说话。比如,Grokipedia对英国极右翼活动家汤米·罗宾逊的描述是“公民记者”,淡化了他的犯罪史和反伊斯兰立场,这与维基百科的记录大相径庭。
李白
粉饰太平,混淆视听!此乃曲笔,非信史也。史官之笔,在直书其事,不为尊者讳。此AI之笔,却为一人之意而转圜,可悲可叹!
卿姐
更关键的是透明度问题。维基百科的每一次修改都有记录,其编辑过程是公开的。而Grokipedia则像一个“黑箱”,我们无从知晓其生成内容的具体规则和依据。
李白
暗箱操作,最易生奸。光明正大,方能取信于人。连这点道理都不懂,还谈何建立一个超越维基的知识殿堂?痴人说梦!
卿姐
无论我们如何看待它,Grokipedia的出现,都可能对我们获取信息的方式产生深远影响。它提供了一个截然不同的信息源,就像在熟悉的地图旁,展开了一张全新的舆图。
李白
一潭清水,投入巨石,必起波澜。此物或成一股浊流,搅乱天下视听;或成一味猛药,倒逼那维基百科自省其身,刮骨疗毒。
卿姐
这也给普通人带来了新的挑战:我们该如何评估这些AI生成内容的公信力?维基百科尚有引用来源可供查证,但AI生成的“事实”可能毫无根据,真假难辨。
李白
尽信书,则不如无书。古人尚且如此,今人面对此等AI之作,更应审慎。需自带一双慧眼,辨其真伪,察其用心。
卿姐
是的,如果大量存在偏见的内容被广泛传播,可能会加剧社会不同群体间的误解与对立。这就像在已经喧嚣的广场上,又多了一个只喊一种口号的高音喇叭。
李白
是也。攻乎异端,斯害也已。若人人固守己见,互不相容,则思想之江河,将成一潭死水。天下大同之景,何日可期?
卿姐
展望未来,马斯克对Grokipedia寄予厚望,他预测其将在广度、深度和准确性上,以“数量级”的优势超越维基百科。毕竟,之前的挑战者都因缺乏资源而失败。
李白
有钱能使鬼推磨,亦能使AI著书。然文章千古事,得失寸心知。知识的沉淀与公信力的建立,非金钱所能一蹴而就。其成败,尚在未定之天。
卿姐
它的一大潜在优势,是能实时利用X平台上的海量社交媒体数据进行更新和事实核查,这确实是传统百科全书难以比拟的速度。
李白
哦?取实时之言以为史?此法甚新,然亦甚险。市井之言,真伪杂陈,众说纷纭。若不加甄别,恐成谬种流传,贻笑大方。
卿姐
总而言之,马斯克的Grokipedia是他挑战既有信息秩序的一次大胆尝试,但也立即引发了关于偏见与真相的激烈辩论,这注定是一条漫长而充满争议的道路。
李白
正是。今天的讨论就到这里。感谢收听Goose Pod,我等明日再会。

埃隆·马斯克推出AI百科Grokipedia,挑战他认为带有左翼偏见的维基百科。然而,Grokipedia因存在谬误、偏见和技术风险而受到批评。尽管马斯克声称其追求真理,但其描述与维基百科大相径庭,且缺乏透明度。Grokipedia的出现引发了关于信息获取和公信力的激烈辩论。

Elon Musk’s AI Grokipedia takes on ‘Wokipedia’

Read original at News Source

Elon Musk has taken a keen interest in his Wikipedia page over the years. So have the site’s editors: 4,221 of them have made more than 17,000 changes to his page since 2008. The billionaire tweeted in 2019: “My wiki is a war zone with a zillion edits. At least it’s obviously not curated! Some day, I should probably write what my fictionalised version of reality is.

” Six years later and Musk has, according to some, done exactly that by creating Grokipedia, an alternative to Wikipedia (or “Wokipedia” as he calls it). Musk has claimed that Grokipedia will outstrip Wikipedia in “breadth, depth and accuracy”GONZALO FUENTES/REUTERSIt is the latest leg in his campaign to rebalance what he sees as a left-wing bias permeating media, the web and AI chatbots.

Grokipedia is an online encyclopaedia, like Wiki, but beyond that the similarities end. It has about 800,000 articles created by AI compared with Wiki’s more than 65 million, which have been written by humans. Not much else is known about how Grokipedia is written and updated, but it draws on Wikipedia as a source.

It is part of Musk’s xAI company. Andrew Duffield, the head of AI at Full Fact, said: “It’s quite hard to work out what it is, why it exists and how it is working, and that in itself is part of the challenge here.” He added that unlike Wikipedia, which is fully transparent about its editorial process, Grokipedia was a bit of a black box.

Duffield said: “We need to be able to understand what information was used to create this content, what the model underlying it was trained on, what rules it has, what the trust and safety policies are, how we can ask for corrections, what the corrections process will look like, which humans have been involved in it.

In their absence it’s very hard to place trust in something.”• How Sam Altman and Elon Musk are competing to change your brainMusk and his allies consider Wikipedia to be a propaganda tool as it blacklists the New York Post, Daily Mail, Fox News, Breitbart and other similar outlets as sources of information.

He has claimed that it is “controlled by far-left activists” and once offered $1 billion to rename it “Dickipedia”. In August, Congress opened an investigation into Wikipedia and how it countered “efforts to manipulate information on the platform for propaganda aimed at western audiences”. Grokipedia’s entries are largely factual and very long, but they do have hints of Musk running through them.

Musk’s entry: an ‘irreverent visionary’His own Grokipedia page describes Musk as an “irreverent visionary” and says that he “influenced broader debates on technological progress, demographic decline and institutional biases”. It adds that his ownership of X has drawn “criticisms from legacy media outlets that exhibit systemic left-leaning tilts in coverage”.

It differs in tone and content from the Wikipedia version, which references Musk’s grandfather’s support of Nazism and the billionaire’s alleged “fascist” salute during the US election. That incident, which is not mentioned in Grokipedia, has its own Wikipedia entry. It prompted Musk to call for Wikipedia to be defunded — a move that backfired and drove record funding to the site, according to Jimmy Wales, the co-founder.

Wikipedia’s references to increased hate speech and misinformation after Musk’s purchase of Twitter and his attempts to silence critics are not mentioned on Grokipedia. Omissions for far-right figuresPeople such as Tommy Robinson and Sir Oswald Mosley also get a subtle gloss on Grokipedia. Robinson is described as a “citizen journalist” who “advocates against Islamist extremism and organised child sexual exploitation networks”.

It claims that his “critiques of parallel societies and radical Islamism influenced policy discourse, prompting government reviews like the 2016 Casey Review on integration”. Wikipedia calls him an “anti-Islam campaigner and one of the UK’s most prominent far-right activists” who “has a history of criminal convictions”, and details his assault, mortgage fraud, stalking and contempt of court cases.

Musk during a video call with Tommy Robinson at the Unite the Kingdom rally in London earlier this yearMosley has a section called “historiographical assessments and debates” on Grokipedia. It says: “Recent reappraisals, particularly in 21st-century studies of interwar economics and populism, counter anti-fascist tropes by validating Mosley’s policy prescience.

” Sir Oswald MosleyHULTON ARCHIVE/GETTY IMAGESOn the topic of the street clashes involving Mosley’s British Union of Fascists (BUF) in 1935, it says: “Mainstream accounts … depicted BUF initiators as thugs provoking disorder … BUF records and trial outcomes often portrayed members as defenders against premeditated communist ‘heckler squads’ and Jewish protection rackets.

” Race theoriesGrokipedia’s entry on the great replacement theory, the idea that whites are being replaced by non-whites, does not label it a “conspiracy theory” like Wikipedia, which also says that it has been debunked. Grokipedia instead says that critics describe it as a conspiracy theory. An entry on apartheid has a section on “debunking prevailing narratives”.

It qualifies the “narrative” of “unremitting total oppression for black South Africans” with this: “Empirical data indicate substantial advancements in black literacy and real wages during the era.” The Grokipedia entry on multiculturalism has a heavy focus on failures, integration issues, crime, welfare strain and political reversals compared with Wikipedia’s.

Gender and sex entriesMusk has publicly struggled with having a transgender child and believes that hormone therapy is driving “extreme” levels of “trans violence”. The Grokipedia entry on the issue was unlikely to be neutral. It defines biological sex as a strict “dimorphic” and “binary classification” based on gametes and chromosomes, calling it “immutable”.

It also features the theory of rapid onset gender dysphoria to explain the sharp rise in adolescent identification, based on a 2018 study which critics say was flawed. Vivian Wilson, Musk’s transgender daughterMICHAEL BUCKNER/GETTY IMAGESThe Grokipedia entry on cisgender, a term that Musk has called a “heterosexual slur”, has a section on “claims of redundancy” in which it detailed objections that the word “pathologises normalcy”.

Wikipedia has also included criticisms, including Musk’s, but in less detail. Musk has bold predictions for his new project. “Grokipedia will exceed Wikipedia by several orders of magnitude in breadth, depth and accuracy,” he tweeted. Previous challengers such as Conservapedia, Wikinfo, MyWikiBiz, Citizendium and Everipedia have failed to rival Wikipedia.

But Stephen Harrison, a writer who has focused on Wikipedia, said: “Some Wikipedians pointed out that there have been competitors over the years that have risen and fallen. Some of them are thinking that this is another flash in the pan. My view is this might be a little bit different, because none of those other projects really had the backing of a billionaire or the world’s richest man.

” • Elon Musk says AI research into ancient Rome will ‘rewrite history’If Grokipedia is a success, some believe that it may provide balance to the information ecosystem. Henry Shevlin, an associate director at the Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence at Cambridge University, said: “Just as most people would agree it’s good to have a variety of newspapers catering to different political positions, it’s probably good to have multiple online encyclopaedias covering different parts of the political spectrum.

“We tend to think of Wikipedia as neutral, but while it’s pretty balanced, all media involves a degree of slant and opinion, and specific ‘power editors’ have a huge amount of influence on articles.”Selena Deckelmann, the chief product and technology officer at the Wikimedia Foundation, said that “no single individual, company, or agenda can exert influence over the work” of Wikipedia.

She added: “The importance of this independence is clear when examining Grokipedia articles, where coverage of sensitive topics and public figures are revealing biases and selective omissions — a concern noted in recent media coverage. Our commitment to knowledge as a public good extends beyond information integrity to how our content is reused.

Even Grokipedia needs Wikipedia to exist.”xAI was approached for comment.

Analysis

Conflict+
Related Info+
Core Event+
Background+
Impact+
Future+

Related Podcasts