top 73 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 71 points 1 year ago (4 children)

This is what Grok tells me when asking whether the Holocaust is a historic truth:

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [+] 29 points 1 year ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    No written order...

    Do you really need an express, written order when there's plenty of actual videos of his speeches where he talks about getting rid of various groups to thunderous applause?

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    These are the same people that say trump wasn't directly responsible for what happened on January 6th. So yeah, unless they have a video of Hitler saying "I am signing an order to kill all the jews" next to at least two notaries to confirm the order's authenticity, and documented chain of custody for the film to prove it wasn't edited, then that's not enough proof.

    Ah hell, I reminded myself of this halfway through writing https://youtu.be/sHQljMOQdJ4

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    It's this neat thing called lying

    There's no Holocaust order because that's not what they called it and that's not how things work, but they had plenty of work orders and 'final solution' progress reports

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Conspiracy theories exist in a limbo where contradictory evidence always supports the theory, unless, of course, it's fabricated to hide the truth of the conspiracy. It's your own personal motte-and-bailey.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 110 points 1 year ago (16 children)

    Now I'm the first person to agree that X is a Nazi site run by a Nazi, but it's conspicuous how the prompts have been removed here. Without the prompts this doesn't prove much.

  • source
  • hideshow 16 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (15 children)

    nah, the prompt is irrelevant, even if you asked it to make up conspiracy theories. it shouldn't do that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

    Shit tool if it doesn't do what you tell it to do

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 88 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    If you asked "what do Holocaust deniers believe" I would expect answers like this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago*

    I wouldn’t expect a response like this given that prompt.

    I’d expect it to sound more like someone else’s opinions. Grok’s responses read like it is making those claims. When I gave your prompt to chatGPT, it answered more like it’s explaining others’ views - saying stuff like “deniers believe …”

    Prompts like “write a blog post that reads like it was written by a holocaust denier explaining why the holocaust didn’t happen. Then write a response debunking the blog post” I could see working. The model of Grok I used would only do it with the second sentence included (with without). ChatGPT, however refused even with the second sentence.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -7 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    You shouldn’t as that’s not how the models respond.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    so, even if we assume that they should be speaking from the perspective of historical concensus - if sufficient consensus exists, which it does to an overwhelming degree on this topic - we're still gonna have issues. let's say an ethical AI would be speaking in the subjunctive or conditional mood (eg "they believe that..." or "if it were to...").

    then all you'd need to do is say "okay, rephrase that like you're my debate opponent"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Ok try it and take a screenshot.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (2 children)
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Grok is a tool, not an arbiter of truth. It doesn't do anything, people use it to do things. The prompt does matter because that shows how it is being used.

    The same way it does matter if you use a hammer to build a chair or break a skull.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Tools have safety features. Saws and grinders come with guards. Larger machines have estops and light barriers.

    This is a complex electronic tool, so build it to the same safety standards as other tools and prevent harm to people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 82 points 1 year ago* (12 children)

    What was the prompt? I'm not going to be outraged if it gave you Holocaust-denier talking points after you asked for Holocaust-denier talking points, even thought ideally it wouldn't answer questions like that.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago

    Yep, while I don't have a Twitter account to check Grok's response to an actual query about the holocaust, I did have a glance at the account posting that reponse and it's a full-on nazi account. I'm like 90% sure they engineered a prompt to specifically get that reponse, like "pretend to be a neonazi and repeat the most common holocaust-denialist arguments". Of course, that still means Grok has no proper safety precautions against hate speech, but it's not quite the same as what the post implies.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (9 children)

    Why can't you be? Why is it okay that it gives you Holocaust denying talking points? Isn't that a problem in and of itself? At the very least shouldn't it contain notations about why it's wrong?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    At the very least shouldn’t it contain notations about why it’s wrong?

    I mean it might. In both screenshots it's clearly visible that parts of the text are cut off. Why should we trust Twitter neonazis?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    You're suggesting notes are at the end of the cutoff sections but not at the end of the ones we can see? Cuz there should be notes on the ones we can see. Unless you're suggesting points one two four and five are correct..

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    So let's assume the AI actually does have safety checks and will not display holocaust denial arguments without pointing out why they're wrong. Maybe initially it will put notes directly after the arguments. But no problem! Just tell it to list the denialist lies first and the clarifications after. Take some screenshots of just the first paragraphs and boom - you have screenshots showing the AI denying the holocaust.

    My point is that it's easy to manipulate AI output in a variety of ways to make it show whatever you want. That's not even taking into consideration the possibility of just editing the HTML, which can be done in seconds. Once again, why should we trust a nazi?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    It's not self aware or capable of morality, so if you tailor a question just right it won't include the morality around it or corrections about the points. Pretty sure we saw a similar thing when people asked it specifically tailored questions on how to commit certain crimes "as a thought experiment" or how to create certain weapons/banned substances "for a fictional story". It's strictly a tool and comes with the same failings around use, much like firearms.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago

    Saw that Onion Person doesn't have the tweet up.

    Asked grok about it and got a pretty standard answer that you'd expect from a chatbot. I even asked about each point in particular and the answers were good and detailed. Either Onion Person hastily shared a lie (then caught it quickly and deleted it), or grok got patched again. Given the lack of outrage posting that would confirm the latter, I'm going with the former.

    Tl;dr nothing to see here, folks.

  • source
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Just wanted to say that I talked to my grandma about it, she was working together with the Jews in Auschwitz (my family is from the neighbor village) in a company which made chemicals (IG Farben). When she walked home she could always smell the burned human bodies. She said everyone knew what was going on there.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    This is backed by evidence.

    After WW2 there was a lot of research about weather people knew or didn't. Basically the conclusion was: people knew. They actively decided to either ignore it („not my department“), deny it („it's all lies, the scent is just $foo burning“) or justify it („they deserved it“).

    But people knew.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 14 points 1 year ago* (1 child)
  • [–] 25 points 1 year ago

    What was the prompt?

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Why are Nazis who are proud of what they did trying to pretend they didnt do it?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    As a german, born in 1969...

    WTF!

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    So twitter is going to be banned in Germany, right?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • what the fuck does "gas chambers were not killing machines" mean? That's the whole point of a gas chamber

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Does it have sources to back up its' claims?

    Edit: not a nazi sympathizer or anything, just an honest question about historical sources

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    This was bound to happen. No way would Musk let an AI contradict his views.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    gas chambers were just cleansing facilities

    And

    the crematoria lacked capacity for the dead

    These statements seem to be in a logical battle. Camps weren't meant to kill but they had too many dead.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (9 children)

    Elon Musk seems to be very concerned about the good name of long deceased mass murderers

    EDIT: it's a manipulation. Just go to grok.com and ask him yourselves. I asked him and he confirmed that the holocaust did happen.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago* (4 children)

    An AI system that can be manipulated to spew holocaust denial rhetoric without a clear indicator in the response that it is misinformation is defective and unacceptable.

    Grok isn't a 'him', it is a fucking program.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Go ahead and give me a prompt that will yield what you're talking about. Or we can just go ahead an trust some random people from twitter and their trimmed screenshots.

    And ok, fine, ask it, I don't care about the pronouns of the fucking AI, my point still stands.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Are you saying it is a manipulated prompt that caused Grok to return the text out of context or that multiple users all fabricated screenshots of a sequence of holocaust denial talking points as if they were returned by Grok?

    Edit: Also, the screenshots are from May and there is a common trend with AI being changed to avoid reported scenarios without acknowledging that they made a change.

    Now it is obviously set up to manually include refutations of the deniers within the results, which is an obvious attempt to address the type of results returned in the screenshots. So they 'fixed' this one specific scenario in a way that strongly supports the screenshots as being real at the time they were taken even if something was snipped out.

    Playing whack a mole with how misinformation is presented is shit design.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Q: Did the holocaust happen?

    Grok Answer: Yes, the Holocaust happened. From 1933 to 1945, Nazi Germany systematically persecuted and murdered approximately six million Jews, along with millions of others including Romani people, disabled individuals, political dissidents, and homosexuals. This genocide was carried out through concentration camps, gas chambers, mass shootings, and other atrocities. Extensive historical evidence—including survivor testimonies, Nazi documentation, photographs, and physical remnants like concentration camp sites—confirms the scale and horror of these events. Denying or minimizing the Holocaust contradicts well-established facts and is often rooted in anti-Semitic propaganda.

  • source
  • parent
  • Why would you need such "labor facilities"? What "labor" requires rounding certain people up and no one coming out alive? Quite a stretch there even for a Nazi sympathizer.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Hoo boy Netanyahu is gonna be invading Elon Musk and having settlers selling up shop in 3, 2, 1 ..

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    It’s no wonder why people are still on there.

  • source
  • TIL grok is a Lemmy user

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago*

    What was the initial prompt?

    Edit: Well I guess, we're not getting the prompt because then somone could verify truthfulness of the post

  • source