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
There was one other time, when he cursed a tree because he didn’t like its fruit, but yeah in general he disliked the nascent forms of capitalism and money people that he encountered.
he misses his sister mom too. She probably gives him special favors
Maybe Staatsoberhaupt. I would translate it as “leader”. But given how illegitimate his reign was, it is still a bit to soft.
Most people do, feeling of power or at least positive connection to someone’s feeling of power are very intoxicating. I even wonder how many 16 years old girls you knew when you were in high school. No justice or mercy there if you try to keep moral high ground and ignore that component. (I did, LOL.)
The thing about Nazis is that they’ve lost, so one could get pretty believable feeling of power from their own military and patriotic aesthetic in most of the western nations and socialist bloc, while Nazis would be something of that past with fraktur lettering and stylish evil. A bit like vampires.
Now, today both western and Soviet patriotic aesthetic have kinda rotten. The Soviet kind is associated with murderous madness between two strongest former members, the western kind is associated with paying 20x the right money to kill brown people in their homeland without even getting their oil in the end.
While Nazis, eh, lost. So haven’t lived till now and are remembered young and cute, so to say.
I mean, yes, they gave him that title. Roughly translatable as “the leader” or “the chieftain”.
What’s the problem?
Britannica, for comparison, has contained and still contains Armenian genocide denial in plenty of its articles touching upon Armenia even in little ways. It’s honestly not that good on most other subjects I know anything about. It’s good enough, I’ve heard, on scientific and technical subjects, point in time year 1960. And its articles are, eh, far less detailed than Wikipedia, usually. Yet people don’t bark at Britannica because that’s not in fashion. Actually people still recommend Britannica as a beacon of sanity in the age where anyone can silently abuse a Wikipedia article, or something like that.
Come on, it’s just another internet encyclopedia which is like Wikipedia, but with creators’ truth not burdened with proof and all wrong people banned without bureaucracy, “truth” and “wrong” being up to subjective interpretation here.
