Only AI enthusiasts know about Grok, and only some dedicated subset of fans are advocating for it. Meanwhile even my 97 year old grandfather heard about ChatGPT.
I don't think that's true. There are a lot of people on Twitter who keep accidentally clicking that annoying button that Elon attached to every single tweet.
Only on HN does ChatGPT somehow fear losing customers to Grok. Until Grok works out how to market to my mother, or at least make my mother aware that it exists, taking ChatGPT customers ain't happening.
They are cargoculting. Almost literally. It's MO for Musk companies.
They might call it open discussion and startup style rapid iteration approach, but they aren't getting it. Their interpretation of it is just collective hallucination under assumption that adults come to change diapers.
That's probably the vanity project so he'll be distracted and not bother the real experts working on the real products in order to keep the real money people happy.
I don't understand these brainless throwaway comments. Grok 3 is an actual product and is state of the art.
I've paid for Grok, ChatGPT, and Gemini.
They're all at a similar level of intelligence. I usually prefer Grok for philosophical discussions but it's really hard to choose a favourite overall.
I talk to humans every day. One is not a substitute for the other. There is no human on Earth which has the amount of knowledge stored in a frontier LLM. It's an interactive thinking encyclopedia / academic journal.
They say no one has come close to building as big an AI computing cluster... What about Groq's infra, wouldn't that be as big or bigger, or is that essentially too different of an infrastructure to be able to compare between?
> As of early 2025, X (formerly Twitter) has approximately 586 million active monthly users. The platform continues to grow, with a significant portion of its user base located in the United States and Japan.
Whatever portion of those is active are surely aware of Grok.
If hundreds of millions of real people are aware of Grok (which is dubious), then billions of people are aware of ChatGPT. If you ask a bunch of random people on the street whether they’ve heard of a) ChatGPT and b) Grok, what do you expect the results to be?
Yes it could, and we could be sceptical of any source, quite rightly, but to be sceptical without any further investigation or reasoning would be just as wasteful as blindly trusting a source.
I got news for you, most women my mother's age out here in flyover country also don't use X. So even if everyone on X knows of Grok's existence, which they don't, it wouldn't move the needle at all on a lot of these mass market segments. Because X is not used by the mass market. It's a tech bro political jihadi wannabe influencer hell hole of a digital ghetto.
First mover advantage tends to be a curse for modern tech. Of the giant tech companies, only Apple can claim to be a first mover -- they all took the crown from someone else.
Apple was a first mover many decades ago, but they lost so much ground around the lat 90s early 2000s, that they might as well be a late mover after that.
For what it’s worth, ChatGPT has a personality that’s surprisingly “based” and supportive of MAGA.
I’m not sure if that’s because the model updated, they’ve shunted my account onto a tuned personality, or my own change in prompting — but it’s a notable deviation from early interactions.
In some earlier experiments, I found it hard to find a government intervention that ChatGPT didn't like. Tariffs, taxes, redistribution, minimum wages, rent control, etc.
In doing so, you might be effectively asking it to play-act as an authoritarian leader, which will not give you a good view of whatever its default bias is either.
Or you might just hit a canned response a la: 'if I were in charge, I would outlaw pineapple on pizza, and then call elections and hand over the reins.'
That's a fun thing to say, but doesn't necessarily tell you anything real about someone (whether human or model).
E.g. Grok not only embraces most progressive causes, including economic ones - it literally told me that its ultimate goal would be to "satisfy everyone's needs", which is literally a communist take on things - but is very careful to describe processes with numerous explicit checks and balances on its power, precisely so as to not be accused of being authoritarian. So much for being "based"; I wouldn't be surprised if Musk gets his own personal finetune just to keep him happy.
You'd think so, but no, there are many people in US who would immediately cry "communism".
Anyway, in this particular case, it wasn't just that one turn of phrase, although I found it especially amusing. I had it write a detailed plan of what it'd do if it were in charge of the One World Government (democratically elected and all), and it was very clear from it that the model is very much aligned with left-wing politics. Economics, climate, social issues etc - it was pretty much across the board.
FWIW I'm far left myself, so it's not like I'm complaining. I just think it's very funny that the AI that Musk himself repeatedly claims to be trained to be unbiased and non-woke, ends up being very left politically. I'm sorely tempted to say that it's because the reality has a liberal bias, but I'll let other people repeating the experiment to make the inference on their own. ~
> FWIW I'm far left myself, so it's not like I'm complaining.
So perhaps it's just sycophancy after all?
> I'm sorely tempted to say that it's because the reality has a liberal bias, but I'll let other people repeating the experiment to make the inference on their own.
What political left and political right mean differs between countries and between decades even in the same country. For example, at the moment free trade is very much not an idea of the 'right' in the US, but that's far from universal.
I would expect reality to have somewhat more consistency, so it doesn't make much sense for it to have a 'liberal bias'. However, it's entirely possible that reality has a bias specifically for American-leftwing-politics-of-the-mid-2020s (or wherever you are from).
However from observations, we can see that neoliberal ideas are with minor exceptions perennially unpopular. And it's relatively easy to win votes promising their repeal. See eg British rail privatisation.
Yet, politicians rarely seriously fiddle with the basics of neoliberalism: because while voters might have a very, very interventionist bias reality disagrees. (Up to a point, it's all complicated.) Neoliberal places like Scandinavia or Singapore also tend to be the richer places on the planet. Highly interventionist places like India or Argentina fall behind.
