In late October, Elon Musk released a Wikipedia alternative, with pages written by his AI chatbot Grok. Unlike its nearly quarter-century-old namesake, Musk said Grokipedia would strip out the “woke” from Wikipedia, which he previously described as an “extension of legacy media propaganda.” But while Musk’s Grokipedia, in his eyes, is propaganda-free, it seems to have a proclivity toward right-wing hagiography.

Take Grokipedia’s entry on Adolf Hitler. Until earlier this month, the entry read, “Adolf Hitler was the Austrian-born Führer of Germany from 1933 to 1945.” That phrase has been edited to “Adolf Hitler was an Austrian-born German politician and dictator,” but Grok still refers to Hitler by his honorific one clause later, writing that Hitler served as “Führer und Reichskanzler from August 1934 until his suicide in 1945.” NBC News also pointed out that the page on Hitler goes on for some 13,000 words before the first mention of the Holocaust.

Archive: http://archive.today/aEcz0

  • khannie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    4 months ago

    I mean the whole stupid Grokipedia thing is a shit show that will never take off, but Fuhrer is just “leader” in German. In it’s used context for Hitler it straight up means dictator and (iirc) only came into full on use after the plebiscite giving him full dictatorial power after Hindenburg’s death in 1934 (edit: He was already the Reich’s Chancellor and merged in Hindenburg’s powers with the vote to make himself full dictator / Fuhrer).

    I’d welcome input from a German national - Is the word still used there?

    • freebee@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      4 months ago

      Not German but moved to Germany. The word is still a normal word, it can be used, only in certain contexts not.

      To me it is very very weird.

      Especially in a comboword there is 0,0 issue: Reiseführer, Bergführer, etc. The no go zone seems very subtle to me, it’s more about pronunciation and context, not the word itself. Especially the word “Führerschein” is super weird to me when used in regular conversations. I automatically hear translated “license to be the Führer”, but it just means driver’s license and nothing else and no one finds it weird.

      • BlackLaZoR@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        “Führerschein” is super weird to me when used in regular conversations. I automatically hear translated “license to be the Führer”

        Not weird for point of view of polish speaker - we use same word “prowadzić” for driving a car, running a company or just leading someone to some destination. From that perspective concept of leading a country and “leading” a car is perfectly intuitive

      • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        Exactly.

        If you are describing hitler’s role in WW2? Yes, he was The German Fuhrer.

        I would say that, honestly, I prefer the second version as it is more accurate to what he was. But any time you change something you have to ask “what does it mean that we are changing things?”

        And since musk is, at best, someone who wishes he was as cool as the losers on LUE back in the day? This is very much not being done with a journalistic style guide in mind.

    • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      You don‘t really call him just the Führer in academic works so anything that works like an encyclopedia shouldn‘t either. The title is charged with either mockery or admiration. It should have no place in this context, because it should at least try to be neutral if you ask me.

      • khannie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’m in the thick of a 90 hour audiobook trilogy on the third Reich which is absolutely incredible (link) and Fuhrer is used liberally, partly to describe his ascent to absolute dictator as opposed to just Reich’s Chancellor.

        I’m not defending shitopedia for one second! I’m just not sure it’s as outrageous as other shit that’s taking up our limited attention span at the moment is all.

    • r3tr0_97@ani.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      Not a german national, but I’m learning it at school, and they say that if you go to a german-speaking region, it’s better to say “chef”, because “führer” is still connected to that guy

    • Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Only his followers actually use(d) that title for him, everyone else when using that word about him, would say it’s the title his followers call(ed) him. Like how wikipedia is using it. Grok is just using it as his title, like a follower would.

      You can think of it kind of like “dear leader” in north korea. Anyone calling him that outside of north korea is at least doing it sarcastically or using air quotes. This would be like if the news called him that with a sincere reverent tone.

    • klay1@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      German here: you can use “Führer” only with specific other context. There could be for example “Gruppenführer” -> the leader of a group. Or “Anführer” -> could be the elder of a tribe. If you clearly use it in a neutral context, no problem.

      But if you use it just like that, it will immediately raise concern if you really meant to say it this way.

    • turdcollector69@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s funny that they made a conservative Wikipedia (snowflake safe space much?) because those people don’t read shit.

    • samus12345@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Fuhrer is just “leader” in German.

      Yeah, go to Germany and call any leader “Führer” and see how well that goes. Uh, maybe not in Eastern Germany where they’ll probably like it.

  • lefthandeddude@lemmy.dbzer0.comBanned
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Musk is clearly a Nazi.

    First, there’s the Nazi salute. There’s no reason to do that unless you are a Nazi.

    Second, Nazis called Hitler my Furer, and he’s rewriting it this way specifically for this reason. It is an honorific title and he’s showing honor to Hitler.

    Third, Musk deflects from accusations he’s a Nazi (“that’s a crazy thing to say”) but he never responds by saying “What Hitler did was horrible and I’m not a Nazi and detest their ideology” which is what someone would say if not a Nazi.

    The scary thing about this is Musk will soon control a large robot army. At that point, he could appoint white supremacists to lead the robot army and pick up where Hitler left off. This is a real threat for Jewish people as well as other minorities.

    • patatahooligan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      4 months ago

      Third, Musk deflects from accusations he’s a Nazi (“that’s a crazy thing to say”) but he never responds by saying “What Hitler did was horrible and I’m not a Nazi and detest their ideology” which is what someone would say if not a Nazi.

      This is the most important point, IMO. Fascists who want mainstream acceptance know not to have swastika tattoos and not to openly say they love Hitler. They will always try to have some plausible deniability. Don’t get dragged into their bullshit arguments. There’s no point in debating whether the nazi salute was some other motion that was misinterpreted. Even if it was, the first thing a non-nazi would do would be to clarify that they are not a nazi and don’t want nazis to think they’re their allies. Even if Musk had completely inadvertently stumbled upon the love and support of the nazis via a series of misunderstandings (lol), at this point in time he is deliberately choosing to be part of them.

      Here is Musk at 3:08:01 saying he’s not a nazi… and then going on to say you’re not a nazi unless you’re literally invading Poland and doing the holocaust. That is literally the only objectionable thing about the nazis. Not their “fashion sense or mannerisms”. Yes that was a direct quote. There is really only one type of person that would not mention as objectionable the nazi ideology or all the acts of violence that are not at the same scale as the holocaust.

    • CaptainBlinky@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      He’s just an edgelord. He thinks he’s funny and edgy and everyone wants to be his friend. Inside he’s a scared little boy who wants his daddy to love him but his daddy is a nazi who hates him.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Isn’t “Furer” just the German word for leader? I’m pretty sure the word existed before Hitler and the Nazis I don’t think they invented it.

      • groet@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        The word Führer is 99% used for Hitler. There are many variants that are OK to use though. Most notably Anführer (if Führer is leader, Anführer would be “the one who leads ahead”) which is the common word to use for leader. Others are composites like Bergführer (mountain guide).

        The swastica also existed before the nazis but is now forever tainted.

        • jdr@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          What about someone who drives a car? Many Germans have a Führerschein in their wallet. It’s just a normal-ass word.

          • groet@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            4 months ago

            You can read right?

            Führer = Hitler
            Something-Führer / Führer-Something = not Hitler

    • T156@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      I don’t think he is one, not really.

      I think he wants to be one, but isn’t one himself, which is perhaps sadder.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      A robot army that will all self drive!!

      Elon is so smart, bet there is some 6D Polytopia behind his plummeting (-50% in Europe) tesla sales.

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    4 months ago

    Conservapedia already did this something like twenty years ago. It missed the entire purpose of the project, which was to invite a kaleidoscope of specialists and journalists to document the volume of known information categorically, primarily through citation to other online works.

    Instead, you had a basket case of ultra-orthodox ideologues carving out a very niche set of contrary opinion posts that weren’t well documented or continuously maintained.

    Conservapedia isn’t a right wing vanity project because of it’s hot takes on Hitler, it’s a vanity project because of the yawning gulfs in it’s data set. Nobody engages with the site, because it is so heavily censored.

    I get the sense Grokapedia will suffer the same fate. If a subject doesn’t tickle Musk’s interest, it’ll either go undocumented or be a naked plagarization of some other online encyclopedia. And as soon as Musk loses interest entirely, support for the service will go the same way as so many private vanity projects.

    Incidentally, Wikipedia’s fate is also an open question. What happens when Jimmy Wales can’t administer and fundraise for it anymore? How long until some hacks get their hooks in and corrupt it like so many other private media outlets?

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        I mean, just having the ability to roll up your own Wiki is very handy.

        I would appreciate a way to archive the citations, so that a link-break down the line doesn’t cause the raw data to be lost. But that’s a problem with copywrite and IP more than anything Wikipedia does natively.

    • tpihkal@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Queue the return of the door to door Encyclopedia salesman. Soon everyone will have a World Book Encyclopedia set in their home again!

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        I still have my dad’s 1957 edition sitting on my childhood bedroom shelf.

        It is genuinely kind of wild to read through that thing, in light of modern history.

  • IonTempted@lemmynsfw.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    4 months ago

    Thanks for reminding me to leave a donation on Wikipedia, seriously if we lose Wikipedia we are fucked.

      • Ernest@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        … idk, if Wikipedia is pissing off Deepak Chopra, I’m pretty sure that’s a good thing…


        edit: I think my downvote probably warrants a less flippant explanation. In the past decade, Wikipedia has started explicitly labeling pseudoscience and “alternative medicine” as such, as opposed to their original policy of being so “neutral” they would say things like “some people think this is bogus, but some people think not”. This has, understandably, pissed those people off, and I suppose in some sense they are right? But in this era of widespread and accelerated sanewashing, I think saying these (true!) things does matter, and the people getting pissed off are really just telling on themselves. I would invite you to read the Wikipedia articles on the quoted public figures for yourself, and verify that they really were slandered the way they describe.

        tangentially-related Hank Green video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9zi0ogvPfCA

        • softwarist@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          I should have specified: I don’t agree with every part of the article, but I shared it for this excerpt:

          The Wikimedia Foundation solicits donations from Wikipedia users every year, even though its expenses ($2 million to run hosting and servers) are vanishingly small compared to its profits. Wikimedia has increased its spending over 1000% since 2008 and sits on $97.6 million in assets as of 2016.

          • Ernest@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            ah okay, I think sharing that entire article is kinda endorsing all the weird stuff in it, but thanks for specifying.

            I know those are large numbers, but like, Wikipedia is one of the most visited sites on the internet? “$97.6 million in assets” is peanuts to that (compare it to any other website in a similar range!). The fact that they don’t have that much operating costs is a good thing, right? It means they’re efficient, which is what people love to complain about with non-profits.

            Anyway, it’s not like they ask for much–I think the last fundraiser I saw they were asking for $2.75 a year, if you felt like they provided you that much value over the year. I certainly do, and I donate $10/year to them. If you don’t feel like Wikipedia is worth that cost to you that’s fair–but I think telling other people that they shouldn’t donate because it objectively(?) isn’t worth it is a strange thing to do.

            • softwarist@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Operating expenses don’t necessarily equate to total expenditure. The article also mentions that fifteen executives took home a six-figure salary in 2015; that doesn’t strike me as particularly efficient.

              Notwithstanding, what I originally said was not prescriptive. People are free to spend their money as they see fit. Even I have donated to the Wikimedia Foundation in the past and still believe that they provide invaluable resources for the common good.

              Where I take issue is the fact that the messaging in their campaigns often gives the impression that the organization is scraping by on user donations, whereas in reality they’re sitting on a pile of assets that would ostensibly be in the 99.9ᵗʰ percentile of household net worth in the US.

  • themurphy@lemmy.ml
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    4 months ago

    Tbh, from a historical point of view, The Führer was used to describe Hitler. Now in Germany, it’s basically only used to refer to him.

    I’m not for deleting history, and I think the context is important. People needs to know why The Führer or “der Führer” is bad.

    A context which I think would have helped in another example would be the N-word. If everyone was really taught the history around that word, I think/hope alot of people would think twice before using it today.

    Or is that only me?

    • furry toaster@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Mentioning Adolf Hitler’s title (Führer) is fine (and the information about such title should be included in the wikipedia artcile about him) but why refer to him accross the article by such title?

      • themurphy@lemmy.ml
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s a good point. But The Führer is not something positive, and I wouldnt think much about it.

        I’m don’t think this was an intentional way to make him sound better. I think we should be much more aware of fact checking what it says, than overusing a historical word to describe Hitler. That might just be an AI thing.

    • ozymandias@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      honorific one clause later, writing that Hitler served as “Führer und Reichskanzler from August 1934 until his suicide in 1945.”

      if it’s his honorific and not his official title then that should be clarified… Musk is a nazi, i’m sure grokepedia is a bunch of revisionist bullshit, but it’s not really the smoking gun and seems more like grok not groking the difference between his title and nickname.

      also it pisses me off that they stole grok from the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy

        • ozymandias@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Grok is also a word in hitchhikers guide to the galaxy and is specifically named as the inspiration for Grok….
          but thanks for playing “i read google ai overview”

          • MajorasTerribleFate@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            As a long-time fan of the Hitchhiker’s Guide, I have no memory of the word ‘grok’ appearing, and the internet at large appears to agree.

            I read Stranger in a Strange Land a couple decades ago, and the word is presented in a way that’s pretty easy to remember where you got it from.

            I don’t tend to use Google AI overview or any other such tools to get answers like this to quip back at people, and I’d appreciate if you didn’t just assume I did.

          • dickalan@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Here’s your AI overview you dip head, it’s not fucking in that book

            The word “grok” is not in the book Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy. Instead, “grok” is a neologism coined by Robert A. Heinlein in his 1961 science fiction novel Stranger in a Strange Land. It means to understand intuitively or deeply, often with empathy. Although some discussions and online posts mistakenly associate “grok” with The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, the term actually originates exclusively from Heinlein’s work. In Douglas Adams’ Hitchhiker’s Guide, different slang words appear such as “sass,” “hoopy,” and “frood,” but “grok” is not one of them. The recent AI called Grok is reportedly modeled after the Hitchhiker’s Guide in style or spirit, but the word itself is Heinlein’s creation and not part of Adams’ original book. Therefore, “grok” is not a word from The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy book but from another classic sci-fi novel enti

      • FriendOfDeSoto@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        It’s not that clear really. His official titles would’ve been president and chancellor and he only got one of those in a manner the Weimar constitution legally envisioned. So the system, by which we would decide what an official title is today, was abused and then suspended all together. The title “der Führer” was basically a google translate from “il duce” in Italy and is not entirely honorific because he was leader of the Nazi party first. And he continues to be referred to by this semi-unofficial, semi-honorific title even in history books today and they don’t always bother to disambiguate or add that they mean it sarcastically. So while Grok should be shot into space. And Nazi saluting Melon Usk deserves to be under this much scrutiny and more and can otherwise go eff himself as far as I’m concerned. The Ockham’s razor for this gaff tells me the LLM just regurgitated book knowledge and nobody bothered to filter this with 2025 sensibilities. Not great but also more of a storm in a teacup. This won’t make the top ten of atrocious things coming from the Melon.

        I was also looking for a word other than ‘honorific.’ I find it has a positive connotation and should not apply to the titles of such infamous individuals as Hitler or Mussolini. But I could not come up with anything snappy.

  • SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Grokipedia would strip out the “woke” from Wikipedia

    So are they removing the pages on Insomnia?

  • Formfiller@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    That’s the official turd Reich history. If we don’t win this will be what children will learn in the Shitler youth soon.

  • Tattorack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 months ago

    But Elon is not a nazi! All he did was give out his heart to the crowd in a roman salut!

    You’re not going to complain about a heartfelt roman salut, are you? That would be woke!

  • greenbelt@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    It will be cited as a valid source for presentations at schools around the world lol