I remain cautiously optimistic about Wikipedia's future. No matter how good Grokipedia gets, it will always be controlled by one guy whose interests are money and power.

And no matter what he tells you, Wikipedia will always be controlled by the people.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Yo...

Elon probably argues that this puts knowledge in the hands of the people, but Wikipedia wouldn't work as a stable source of reliable info without its systems and standards for evaluating sources.

pluralistic.net/2025/09/05/b...

Crucially, Grokipedia lacks any discretion over what makes a source reliable, placing random blogs and Reddit posts on a par with peer-reviewed journals and news articles.

They also lack images, links to other articles, and structured data (like tables) that make Wikipedia articles so useful beyond their prose alone.

But in the worst cases (many such cases), they amplify Elon's right-wing political viewpoints, biasing the articles not by crowdsourced consensus but by the arbitrary whims of one guy.

The articles that aren't ripped directly from Wikipedia are weird. In the best cases, they're alright articles that are just bloated and follow the overly verbose writing style characteristic to AI slop (which is what they are).

Elon criticizes Wikipedia as being woke and biased. So it's curious that Grokipedia relies directly on much of its content, AI-paraphrasing it ever-so-slightly under a Creative Commons license.

Billboard crossword: www.billboard.com/p/billboard-...

Bloomberg Alphadots: www.bloomberg.com/games/alphad...

Solve here: www.billboard.com/p/billboard-...

My (very much still work-in-progress) project is here: mindpalace.fun

I wonder if this was the originally submitted clue or a Will Shortz master stroke

They gotta do something about this contrast