I think it’s probabky because of the malcom gladwell “ten thousand hours” idea.

Well, here’s hoping grokpedia goes and joins the rest of the failed attempts.

> and they reject edits that go against their views

Citation needed. See what i did there ;)

They reject edits that go against their views on tone and sourcing not political views that i am aware of - i am sure it happens from time to time but unless there’s a consistant bias in one direction this isn’t a valid criticism of the political neutrality of wikipedia.

Even if there is rampant bias in wikipedia, that’s a reason to fork it and change the structure and gatekeeping - not to replace it with a techno-authoritarian ai version controlled by a single billionaire. That’s amplifying the problem from an aggregate bias of 600,000 users who have made an edit in the last 30 days[1] to just one editor who uses ai to make it seem impartial.

[1] https://expandedramblings.com/index.php/wikipedia-statistics...

I think the issue is simply this: wikipedia trends towards unbiased info through use of the crowd. Grok, with a single owner with an ax to grind, trends towards whatever elon wants. It’s poisoned information under the control of one man - cyberpunk novels have been written about less.

Business model is: Get acquired