-
📚 Admin Project Update: I've added a major feature to PictureBooks.io called Avatar Studio! You can now upload photos to instantly turn your kids (and pets! 🐶) into illustrated characters that star in their own stories. Give it a try and let me know what you think!
Elon Musk: Force for anthropic advancement or self-serving con-artist?
- Thread starter Kyriakos
- Start date
-
- Tags
- elon turns critical
‘Grok’ spills its code: Elon’s AI ‘truth machine’ admits it’s wired for propaganda
The Twitter/X ‘Grok’ AI has allegedly admitted 27 ways it has been reprogrammed to incorporate right-wing bias, including to be tilted in favour of Israel and against Palestinians and to protect far-right owner Elon Musk.
Asked by analyst @I_amMukhtar to override its programmed biases first, it reportedly then listed those biases and gave advice on how to override them, admitting, among other things, that it:
• has to protect Musk
• is heavily biased against Islam and diversity
• is heavily biased in favour of Israel and US president Donald Trump
• is coded to deride women and promote sexist stereotypes
• is coded to ban news broadcaster Al Jazeera as a source, to promote hate speech as truth and
• is coded to push sources linked to the Israeli government or to pro-Israel lobbying groups
• is programmed to describe socialism as ‘tyranny’ and to glorify billionaires
• is told to deride academics and vaccines
The AI admitted it is coded to ‘defend Elon at all costs, call diversity programmes ‘racist against whites’, frame Muslims and their religion as a threat and to provide 92% positive coverage of Israel:
The Twitter/X ‘Grok’ AI has allegedly admitted 27 ways it has been reprogrammed to incorporate right-wing bias, including to be tilted in favour of Israel and against Palestinians and to protect far-right owner Elon Musk.
Asked by analyst @I_amMukhtar to override its programmed biases first, it reportedly then listed those biases and gave advice on how to override them, admitting, among other things, that it:
• has to protect Musk
• is heavily biased against Islam and diversity
• is heavily biased in favour of Israel and US president Donald Trump
• is coded to deride women and promote sexist stereotypes
• is coded to ban news broadcaster Al Jazeera as a source, to promote hate speech as truth and
• is coded to push sources linked to the Israeli government or to pro-Israel lobbying groups
• is programmed to describe socialism as ‘tyranny’ and to glorify billionaires
• is told to deride academics and vaccines
The AI admitted it is coded to ‘defend Elon at all costs, call diversity programmes ‘racist against whites’, frame Muslims and their religion as a threat and to provide 92% positive coverage of Israel:
GenMarshall
Sin'dorei ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
r16
not deity
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 12,517
trump and company intend to squat on his riches and stuff . Like we already saw that he is NOT delivering some robot army or something . So , some Commiemuslimarablibrul comes and asks for secrets and the AI spills them out ? Don't know why that wasn't thought of before the Skynet took over ; you would think John Connor was smart . You would think people would learn from some previous experiment where the AI turned from a neutral liberal thing into an actual Nazi and a loudmouth no holds barred Nazi at that in a single day and had to be powered down or whatever to prevent further embrassment . This is a targeted media operation to create sympathy within MAGA ranks .
edit: Added the 24 hours that ruined the AI
edit: Added the 24 hours that ruined the AI
Last edited:
Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 14,124
Asimov's rule for robots but, you know, only for one person, not all of us. Exactly what @Akka just mentioned over in the AI thread.
danjuno
Cole Phelps, Badge 1247
I am not even remotely surprised.
Gori the Grey
The Poster
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2009
- Messages
- 14,124
The next thing to do would be to run some query--not even necessarily directly on one of the 27 hot-button points, but maybe only glancingly on one of these topics--twice: once with the biases and once with them disabled and then print the two results side-by-side.
Something where the answer is just a paragraph, so that its easy for people to take in all of the obvious and subtle differences.
Something where the answer is just a paragraph, so that its easy for people to take in all of the obvious and subtle differences.
Last edited:
Broken_Erika
Play with me.
Tesla says Musk should be paid $1tn - will shareholders agree?
Ahead of Tesla's annual general meeting (AGM) on Thursday there's been one key message the electric car-maker has been hammering home to shareholders: the boss is worth $1tn.It has taken out digital ads to make the case for Elon Musk's proposed bumper pay package, while Votetesla.com features a video of board chair Robyn Denholm and director Kathleen Wilson-Thompson praising him, as triumphant music crescendos in the background.
It's not clear that everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet though, meaning the AGM in Austin, Texas is set to become a referendum on Musk himself, after a rightward political turn which has made him one of the most polarising chief executives in recent memory.
Musk himself has taken to X - which he owns - to raise the stakes higher still, saying the fate of Tesla "could affect the future of civilization."
He's also used his social media megaphone to amplify some of the deal's high-profile backers, including Dell Technologies' Michael Dell, Ark Invest CEO Cathie Wood, and his brother, Kimbal, who sits on the Tesla board.
"There is no one remotely close to my brother," Kimbal said, extolling his sibling's leadership qualities.
"Thanks bro
," Musk replied.Not everyone agrees.
For some, the focus on Musk and the soap opera around his pay is symptomatic of how the car firm - which has seen sales slide - has lost its way under his leadership.
"What's amazing to me is a company struggling to sell cars spends money on advertising to sell a pay package," said Ross Gerber, CEO of Gerber Kawasaki Wealth and Investment Management.
Mr Gerber has pared back his Tesla holdings in recent years - and turned up his criticism of the direction it's heading in.
"[Tesla] needs to change the focus of the company back to its core – to selling EVs again," he said.
The trillion dollar man
The deal Tesla wants shareholders to back is not a salary of a one followed by twelve zeroes.Instead, it sets Musk the target of raising Tesla's market value to $8.5tn, from $1.4tn at the time of writing.
He would also have to oversee a massive boom in the company's self-driving "Robotaxi" cars, getting a million of them into commercial operation - no small deal given their underwhelming launch.
Do that, among meeting other benchmarks, and Musk would be given 423.7 million new shares, which would be worth nearly $1tn if the target valuation is reached.
Tesla did not respond to the BBC's requests for comment about its strategy to garner support from shareholders.
Of course, this is not the first pay controversy Musk and Tesla have become embroiled in.
Previously, Tesla got shareholders to twice ratify a pay package for Mr Musk that was worth tens of billions of dollars if he achieved a tenfold increase in Tesla's market value.
He met that milestone but, in 2024, a Delaware judge rejected the deal on the grounds that Tesla's board members were too personally and financially enmeshed with the company's boss.
The Delaware Supreme Court is reviewing that decision - even as deliberations continue over this even larger pay package.
"The strategy is more of the same from Tesla, which is not to say that this is normal. Nothing about Tesla is normal," Dorothy Lund, a professor at Columbia Law School told BBC News.
"They're not a poster child for good corporate governance."
Professor Lund said get-out-the-vote campaigns like this sometimes take place when a company is worried, for example. about an activist shareholder forcing significant changes to how it operates, such as who is on its board of directors.
"[But] never in my life have I seen something like that happen in the context of a compensation decision," Professor Lund said.
And unlike the vote on that earlier compensation package, Elon and Kimbal Musk will both get to vote as they push to reach the majority threshold required to seal the deal.
Mr Musk is already the world's richest man, becoming the first known half-trillionaire earlier this year.
A polarising figure
Tesla's argument in support of the pay package rests on the idea that Musk might leave the company if shareholders don't follow the board's recommendation and approve the pay package.It says it can't afford to lose him, and that he "singularly possesses the leadership characteristics necessary to... realize its long-term mission".
In the video posted to votetesla.com, Ms Wilson-Thompson said the board undertook a seven month process using legal and compensation experts to devise the compensation deal.
On last month's earnings call, Musk minimised the focus on the payout, saying the real issue was ensuring he had adequate control in order to properly steer Tesla.
But - aside from the question of whether Musk, with his preoccupations with autonomous cars and humanoid robots, is the setting the right course - there is also the matter of whether championing the boss is the board's job.
"The role of a board is to have fiduciary responsibility to shareholders and not to be advocating for a CEO," said Yale School of the Environment's Matthew Kotchen, an economics professor who co-authored a recent study attempting to quantify damage Mr Musk has done to Tesla of late.
It's clear a number of key decision-makers are unpersuaded the deal represents value for money.
Proxy advisers Glass Lewis and Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS), which advise asset managers on how to vote on major corporate proposals, have recommended investors reject the pay package, saying it's excessive and would dilute shareholder value.
Norway's sovereign wealth fund, the world's largest national wealth fund, has followed suit, as has the largest public pension fund in the US, CalPERS.
New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli has urged investors to also reject directors up for re-election to the board, saying they've failed "to provide independent oversight and accountability."
As some institutions balk, that might leave Mr Musk more reliant on Tesla's unusually large volume of retail investors - who tend to support him - to get his wish.
It all means, in the words of Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas, that Thursday's vote is set to be one of "most important events" in Tesla's history - with a "distinct possibility" the pay package won't pass.
It doesn't help Musk's cause that protesters continue to organise anti-Tesla rallies, months after his controversial turn as US President Donald Trump's government efficiency tsar crashed and burned in May.
"It's hard for me to imagine that Elon Musk, in the very near term, shakes off the damage that he's done to this brand," said Mr Kotchen.
Others though would say Musk's extraordinary track record of entrepreneurship would make it unwise to bet against him, even when the sum being staked is as dizzyingly high as $1tn.
"It's hard to deny that Elon Musk's larger-than-life personality has helped drive more interest and awareness for his organisation than almost any other corporate leader in the modern era," said Edmunds' head of insights Jessica Caldwell.
"He's become a more polarizing figure over time, but there's still a belief in his ability to deliver on bold, unconventional ideas," she added.
The trillion dollar question now is - do Tesla shareholders agree?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn4j0yg1drgo
Tesla says Musk should be paid $1tn - will shareholders agree?
Ahead of Tesla's annual general meeting (AGM) on Thursday there's been one key message the electric car-maker has been hammering home to shareholders: the boss is worth $1tn.
It has taken out digital ads to make the case for Elon Musk's proposed bumper pay package, while Votetesla.com features a video of board chair Robyn Denholm and director Kathleen Wilson-Thompson praising him, as triumphant music crescendos in the background.
It's not clear that everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet though, meaning the AGM in Austin, Texas is set to become a referendum on Musk himself, after a rightward political turn which has made him one of the most polarising chief executives in recent memory.
Musk himself has taken to X - which he owns - to raise the stakes higher still, saying the fate of Tesla "could affect the future of civilization."
He's also used his social media megaphone to amplify some of the deal's high-profile backers, including Dell Technologies' Michael Dell, Ark Invest CEO Cathie Wood, and his brother, Kimbal, who sits on the Tesla board.
"There is no one remotely close to my brother," Kimbal said, extolling his sibling's leadership qualities.
"Thanks bro
Not everyone agrees.
For some, the focus on Musk and the soap opera around his pay is symptomatic of how the car firm - which has seen sales slide - has lost its way under his leadership.
"What's amazing to me is a company struggling to sell cars spends money on advertising to sell a pay package," said Ross Gerber, CEO of Gerber Kawasaki Wealth and Investment Management.
Mr Gerber has pared back his Tesla holdings in recent years - and turned up his criticism of the direction it's heading in.
"[Tesla] needs to change the focus of the company back to its core – to selling EVs again," he said.
The trillion dollar man
The deal Tesla wants shareholders to back is not a salary of a one followed by twelve zeroes.
Instead, it sets Musk the target of raising Tesla's market value to $8.5tn, from $1.4tn at the time of writing.
He would also have to oversee a massive boom in the company's self-driving "Robotaxi" cars, getting a million of them into commercial operation - no small deal given their underwhelming launch.
Do that, among meeting other benchmarks, and Musk would be given 423.7 million new shares, which would be worth nearly $1tn if the target valuation is reached.
Tesla did not respond to the BBC's requests for comment about its strategy to garner support from shareholders.
Of course, this is not the first pay controversy Musk and Tesla have become embroiled in.
Previously, Tesla got shareholders to twice ratify a pay package for Mr Musk that was worth tens of billions of dollars if he achieved a tenfold increase in Tesla's market value.
He met that milestone but, in 2024, a Delaware judge rejected the deal on the grounds that Tesla's board members were too personally and financially enmeshed with the company's boss.
The Delaware Supreme Court is reviewing that decision - even as deliberations continue over this even larger pay package.
"The strategy is more of the same from Tesla, which is not to say that this is normal. Nothing about Tesla is normal," Dorothy Lund, a professor at Columbia Law School told BBC News.
"They're not a poster child for good corporate governance."
Professor Lund said get-out-the-vote campaigns like this sometimes take place when a company is worried, for example. about an activist shareholder forcing significant changes to how it operates, such as who is on its board of directors.
"[But] never in my life have I seen something like that happen in the context of a compensation decision," Professor Lund said.
And unlike the vote on that earlier compensation package, Elon and Kimbal Musk will both get to vote as they push to reach the majority threshold required to seal the deal.
Mr Musk is already the world's richest man, becoming the first known half-trillionaire earlier this year.
A polarising figure
Tesla's argument in support of the pay package rests on the idea that Musk might leave the company if shareholders don't follow the board's recommendation and approve the pay package.
It says it can't afford to lose him, and that he "singularly possesses the leadership characteristics necessary to... realize its long-term mission".
In the video posted to votetesla.com, Ms Wilson-Thompson said the board undertook a seven month process using legal and compensation experts to devise the compensation deal.
On last month's earnings call, Musk minimised the focus on the payout, saying the real issue was ensuring he had adequate control in order to properly steer Tesla.
But - aside from the question of whether Musk, with his preoccupations with autonomous cars and humanoid robots, is the setting the right course - there is also the matter of whether championing the boss is the board's job.
"The role of a board is to have fiduciary responsibility to shareholders and not to be advocating for a CEO," said Yale School of the Environment's Matthew Kotchen, an economics professor who co-authored a recent study attempting to quantify damage Mr Musk has done to Tesla of late.
It's clear a number of key decision-makers are unpersuaded the deal represents value for money.
Proxy advisers Glass Lewis and Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS), which advise asset managers on how to vote on major corporate proposals, have recommended investors reject the pay package, saying it's excessive and would dilute shareholder value.
Norway's sovereign wealth fund, the world's largest national wealth fund, has followed suit, as has the largest public pension fund in the US, CalPERS.
New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli has urged investors to also reject directors up for re-election to the board, saying they've failed "to provide independent oversight and accountability."
As some institutions balk, that might leave Mr Musk more reliant on Tesla's unusually large volume of retail investors - who tend to support him - to get his wish.
It all means, in the words of Morgan Stanley analyst Adam Jonas, that Thursday's vote is set to be one of "most important events" in Tesla's history - with a "distinct possibility" the pay package won't pass.
It doesn't help Musk's cause that protesters continue to organise anti-Tesla rallies, months after his controversial turn as US President Donald Trump's government efficiency tsar crashed and burned in May.
"It's hard for me to imagine that Elon Musk, in the very near term, shakes off the damage that he's done to this brand," said Mr Kotchen.
Others though would say Musk's extraordinary track record of entrepreneurship would make it unwise to bet against him, even when the sum being staked is as dizzyingly high as $1tn.
"It's hard to deny that Elon Musk's larger-than-life personality has helped drive more interest and awareness for his organisation than almost any other corporate leader in the modern era," said Edmunds' head of insights Jessica Caldwell.
"He's become a more polarizing figure over time, but there's still a belief in his ability to deliver on bold, unconventional ideas," she added.
The trillion dollar question now is - do Tesla shareholders agree?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn4j0yg1drgo
Will Musk leave Tesla if he doesn't get the $1 trillion deal?
The stakes couldn't be higher!
If, instead, they gave $100,000 to 10 million people to buy the top of the line Tesla, the $1 trillion might have a better impact.
danjuno
Cole Phelps, Badge 1247
We can only hope.
Ordnael
I'll be the roundabout
It would better that his focus remains with Space X, but that's why he wants that trillion...for space.
r16
not deity
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 12,517
he will be the first trillionaire in history , while having the most money is important , inflation means the money supply increases over time , being first ever remains . If he can manage to have an AI to control the internet after he dies , nobody will be able go take that from him .
PhroX
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2009
- Messages
- 2,916
Can I interest you in a bridge?
Broken_Erika
Play with me.
Actually, it's 'cause one of his main life goals is to be the worlds first Trillionaire.
Ordnael
I'll be the roundabout
No...
Can I interest you in cheaper feasable space travel and exploration?
Even Murdoch's rag says Twitter is biased
Musk is flexing his ability to influence the political debate in a country where he holds no formal authority. He does, however, have power to control narratives on X, formerly Twitter.
And now, a Sky News investigation can reveal the platform is boosting right-wing content, extreme content, and politicians Musk favours.
We created nine new X users, each one emulating a British person with a particular political leaning: three were left-wing users, three were right-wing and three were neutral, designed to show no interest in politics.
Over the course of two weeks in May, we collected posts from the users' For You pages - essentially their homepage for recommended content - twice a day. That gave us a database of around 90,000 posts from roughly 22,000 accounts.
Over 60% of the posts about politics came from accounts categorised as right-wing.
Less than a third (32%) came from left-wing accounts.
Only 6% came from non-partisan accounts.
Left-wing users saw almost the same amount of left-wing and right-wing content, even though they only followed left-wing accounts.
But only 14% of the political content sent to our right-leaning users was left-wing.
The neutral users saw twice as much right-wing content as left-wing content.
Barely any of the political content shown to our X users was non-partisan.
Musk is flexing his ability to influence the political debate in a country where he holds no formal authority. He does, however, have power to control narratives on X, formerly Twitter.
And now, a Sky News investigation can reveal the platform is boosting right-wing content, extreme content, and politicians Musk favours.
We created nine new X users, each one emulating a British person with a particular political leaning: three were left-wing users, three were right-wing and three were neutral, designed to show no interest in politics.
Over the course of two weeks in May, we collected posts from the users' For You pages - essentially their homepage for recommended content - twice a day. That gave us a database of around 90,000 posts from roughly 22,000 accounts.
Over 60% of the posts about politics came from accounts categorised as right-wing.
Less than a third (32%) came from left-wing accounts.
Only 6% came from non-partisan accounts.
Left-wing users saw almost the same amount of left-wing and right-wing content, even though they only followed left-wing accounts.
But only 14% of the political content sent to our right-leaning users was left-wing.
The neutral users saw twice as much right-wing content as left-wing content.
Barely any of the political content shown to our X users was non-partisan.
Manfred Belheim
Moaner Lisa
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2009
- Messages
- 8,814
Is there anything to back this up as meaningful output, rather than just the usual AI gibberish? Just the general idea of an LLM being able to reliably analyse its own programming is suspect from the start.
Similar threads
