@elonmusk Shame on you for letting your Grok people do such sloppy and thoughtless work.
@elonmusk Shame on you for letting your Grok people do such sloppy and thoughtless work.
Look on the right side of your Twitter(X) page and there is “Explore … Beta” that is a closed hidden Grok effort. They do not label it “AI Generated, be careful”. And there is no Feedback, Suggest, Like. There is no “TEAM”, “Values”, ‘Goals”, Resources, Join, Participate, Create your own, Write review – nothing.
Any AI (chatbots, assistants, guides, helpers, search help,) on the Internet must be clearly labeled if it uses AI, or does things that seems AI but is not. It needs to say which AI and which version. And how it works. If it is humans making the software seem intelligent (sales teams, marketing, support desk, help desk, customer support, live chat with an automated (handwritten or AI) startup — all those need to be clearly identified.
I have been tracking and reviewing these kinds of things every day for the last 26 years of the Internet Foundation. And laying the foundation for decades before that. Many whole sites use software to make the site appear to be a smart. But are inaccessible and no way to handle exceptions — good or bad.
This x “Grok” one is NOT a good example of what a good “AI” should do. Its human in the back rooms are not behaving responsibly, it is not clear and open and trustworthy. Where are the postings coming from. Who chooses? Who writes? Who is mining the clicks and following the users? Is Grok involved? How? What methods are being used? Are they good ones?
Elon, You piously say this like “We are an open platform for global open discussion and collaboration”. But you let this Twitter(x) Grok team anonymously post random items to millions to spark interest and mine who clicks?. Why are you letting your team work unsupervised? I doubt you are watching them or you would not allow it to go up without a clear set of controls and features, purposes and future. Open means: you can see and engage with the team, the teams and staff listen, they record and share feedback. They continuously improve the processes. They mark experiments clearly and give background and allow engagement.
No user oversight? No user involvement? No reports? No statistics? No analysis? No library and summary of feedback, new projects and spinoffs? No list of “suggested resources” to further explore the topics? No summaries and index of discussions?
I rate Grok on X the lowest of all the “public” AIs. It is touted as smart but it will not record the conversations and save them as your content. It will not assist you with searching or organizing. It won’t remember anything for you or for itself to grow to serve you better. It does not help you find, talk to and work together with others. It makes “X supports AI assisted open discussion” a sham.
The whole “roll out” is clumsy, discourteous, off-putting and very low performance. It reflects badly on x and does not require much more than having clear goals and then continuously working to achieve them. You must has some decent programmers? All these countless AI groups pushing their wares on X and the whole community cannot verify and code the input data, cannot verify and help users save and share, merge and compare, verify and improve the combined shared conversations of all X/Grok users?
Richard Collins, The Internet Foundation
