10 Comments
User's avatar
Logan Hayes's avatar

Excited by the SOTA results, but until xAI proves its guardrails, “most powerful” could just as easily mean “most risky”—any sign of independent red-team reviews?

Expand full comment
Lucas Bennett's avatar

Grok 4 edging past Gemini and o3 is headline-worthy, but can xAI show the same rigor in ethics disclosures that it shows in benchmarks?

Expand full comment
Sofia Gray's avatar

$30 a month is tempting, yet I hesitate after last round’s toxicity issues—will paying users get visibility into model updates and fixes?

Expand full comment
Ava Thompson's avatar

The Colossus supercomputer clearly delivers power, but where’s the parallel investment in public-facing safety reports?

Expand full comment
Ethan Maxwell's avatar

Performance is one thing, permission to operate is another; has xAI outlined how it’ll prevent a repeat of Grok 3’s antisemitic slip-ups?

Expand full comment
Emily Carson's avatar

If Grok 4 can “unlock new physics,” transparency should be table stakes—does anyone know whether xAI will open-source the evals?

Expand full comment
Nathalie Morgan's avatar

Love the 128K context window, but without clearer governance it’s hard to cheer—when will xAI let outsiders look under the hood?

Expand full comment
Liam Parker's avatar

Grok 4 Heavy sounds like a powerhouse, but trust still seems the heaviest lift—have they shared who’s auditing these multi-agent systems?

Expand full comment
Ashley Martinez's avatar

Jaw-dropping scores aside, I’m curious how xAI will convince skeptics that Grok 4 won’t repeat Grok 3’s harmful outputs. Are they publishing any safety data?

Expand full comment
Olivia Rose's avatar

The numbers behind Grok 4 are wild, yet it feels like déjà vu after Grok 3’s backlash—does xAI have a concrete plan to prove its guardrails are stronger this time?

Expand full comment