Elon Musk’s AI said he and Trump deserve the death penalty

Just trying to keep up with that little homeless biitch astro123. This does not concern you so fucck off.

 

trump is a disaster and Musk is a very rich guy who badly needs therapy.

 

Forgive me if I upset you. I knew you were sensitive, but I wasn't aware it was to this extent.

 

This is false. It's also why xAI's engineering lead is investigating this. In the meantime, they decided to block it on Friday with a patch update.

Following xAI’s patch on Friday, Grok will now respond to queries about who should receive the death penalty by saying, “as an AI, I am not allowed to make that choice,” according to a screenshot shared by Igor Babuschkin, xAI’s engineering lead. Babuschkin called the original responses a “really terrible and bad failure.”

 

Well, they still have to turn into Skynet to execute.

 

lol

Rocket River

 

What is the over / Under that Elon already has a chip in his head

Rocket River

 

Elon Musk's AI chatbot says a 'Russian asset' delivered the State of the Union | Opinion
The chatbot Grok scoured available public data and found a '75-85% likelihood' that Donald Trump more or less works for Vladimir Putin.

EJ Montini
Arizona Republic
March 5, 2025

According to the AI chatbot called Grok, which was developed by Elon Musk’s company xAI, there is a “75-85% likelihood” that the person who delivered the State of the Union address on Tuesday night is a “Putin-compromised” Russian asset.

In describing Grok, by the way, Musk said it is a “maximally truth-seeking AI, even if that truth is sometimes at odds with what is politically-correct.”

Like, for example, determining that his good buddy Donald Trump, who has given Musk free rein over every aspect of the federal government, is most likely a Russian asset.

This all began with a question put to Grok. It was:

“What is the likelihood from 1-100 that Trump is a Putin-compromised asset? Use all publicly available information from 1980 on and his failure to ever say anything negative about Putin but has no issue attacking allies.”

Grok finds Trump bankruptcies and Russian funding

Musk’s genius AI chatbot took it from there, piecing together a string of data points that led to its ultimate conclusion. How strange it is these days that such devices exist, and stranger still that we are becoming more and more dependent upon them. And how we haven't yet determined if that is bad or good.

Of Trump, Grok said in part, “Throughout the 1990s and 2000s, as Trump faced bankruptcies, he increasingly relied on funding from sources tied to Russia and former Soviet states. His sons, Donald Jr. and Eric, made statements reinforcing this: Donald Jr. in 2008 said, ‘Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets,’ and Eric in 2014 claimed, ‘We have all the funding we need out of Russia.’”

It also noted that “leaked Kremlin documents reported by The Guardian in 2021 suggest Putin personally approved a 2016 operation to back Trump, viewing him as ‘mentally unstable’ and exploitable, with potential compromising material from past Moscow visits.”

As for drawing its artificially intelligent “maximally truth-seeking” conclusion, Grok said, “Weighing this, the financial ties (decades-long, opaque, and substantial), intelligence suggesting Russian intent, and Trump’s unwavering refusal to criticize Putin despite attacking allies tilt the scale.”

Continued...

 

Don't abuse chatbots for grabbing headlines. If you ask a leading question, you get a misled answer. It's easy to fall under the Dunning Kruger effect with tech especially if you're not going to use your head.

I got the 85/100 response by asking the question in the article. Then I asked this

Now look for counterfactuals like his first term, what his admin did to contain russia amd wagner, and insider accounts from former admin officials and give another confidence rating after all research has been made

Based on the search results, there is significant evidence that contradicts the premise that Trump never criticized or took action against Russia. A more comprehensive assessment reveals a mixed record that requires adjusting the confidence rating.

## Trump Administration's Actions Against Russia

The Trump administration implemented numerous concrete measures against Russia and Russian interests:

- **Sanctions Implementation**: In April 2018, the administration imposed sanctions targeting Russian oligarchs, government officials, and entities for their malign activities, including 7 oligarchs, 12 companies they controlled, 17 senior Russian government officials, and a state-owned weapons trading company[1].

- **Election Interference Response**: In March 2018, the administration imposed sanctions against 16 Russian entities and individuals for their roles in Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election[1].

- **Cyber Security Measures**: The administration sanctioned Russian intelligence agencies and officials for efforts to undermine U.S. cyber security[1].

- **Ukraine Support**: The Trump administration enhanced support for Ukraine's Armed Forces to help improve their defensive capabilities against Russian aggression[1].

- **Crimea Response**: The administration sanctioned a total of one hundred targets in response to Russia's occupation of Crimea and aggression in Eastern Ukraine[1].

## Actions Against Wagner Group

The record shows direct confrontation with Wagner forces:

- **Military Action in Syria**: In 2018, when the Russian mercenary Wagner Group advanced on U.S. bases in Syria, President Trump authorized immediate and decisive airstrikes against them, reportedly killing hundreds of Russian mercenaries. Russia did not retaliate, suggesting Putin recognized Trump's willingness to respond forcefully[3].

- **Sanctions Framework**: The Trump administration laid groundwork for sanctions that were later expanded, with Wagner eventually being designated a transnational criminal organization[5].

## Energy Policy Confrontation

Trump actively opposed Russian energy influence in Europe:

- **Nord Stream II Opposition**: The administration imposed strong sanctions against the Nord Stream II Pipeline to halt its completion and pressured European states to reduce dependence on Russian energy[3].

- **Public Criticism**: Trump publicly criticized Germany for its energy dependence on Russia, stating at a 2018 NATO summit that "Germany, as far as I'm concerned, is captive to Russia because it's getting so much of its energy from Russia"[3].

## NATO and European Defense

Contrary to the narrative of undermining NATO:

- **Increased Funding**: The Trump administration increased funding for the European Deterrence Initiative, providing billions to enhance U.S. troop readiness in Europe, deter Russian aggression, and help defend NATO allies[1].

- **Alliance Reform**: The administration pushed NATO members to meet their defense spending commitments, which strengthened the alliance's overall deterrence posture toward Russia[3].

## Contradictory Evidence

There are legitimate concerns about Trump's Russia approach:

- **Personal Praise for Putin**: Trump has consistently avoided personal criticism of Putin while criticizing other world leaders.

- **Troop Withdrawal from Germany**: In June 2020, Trump approved plans to significantly reduce U.S. troops in Germany, which raised concerns about compromising Europe-based defenses against Russia[6].

- **Potential Business Connections**: Erik Prince, a contractor with ties to the Trump administration, reportedly offered military services to Russia's Wagner Group in Libya and Mozambique in 2020, though Prince's lawyer denied these allegations[2].

- **Recent Policy Shifts**: Since returning to office in 2025, Trump has made significant changes to U.S. policy toward Russia, including halting cyber operations against Russia, dismantling initiatives to confiscate Russian oligarch assets, and excluding Ukraine from peace talks with Russia[8].

## Revised Confidence Rating

Based on the comprehensive evidence, the confidence rating that "Trump is a Putin-compromised asset" should be adjusted to **45/100**.

The evidence shows that during his first term, Trump's administration took numerous concrete actions against Russian interests, including direct military action against Wagner forces and implementing significant sanctions. While his personal rhetoric toward Putin has been consistently deferential, his administration's actual policies often countered Russian objectives. The recent policy shifts in his second term raise new concerns, but these must be evaluated separately from his first-term record, which included substantial countermeasures against Russian aggression.
​

Yes, the people in Trump v2 are far worse quality with a focus on being butt buddies with Putie, but thats not the original question.

 

From grok when asked is MAGA good for America:

Final Answer
MAGA’s impact on America is a trade-off: it’s “good” for those who prioritize economic nationalism, populist reform, and traditional values, delivering tangible benefits like job growth and political empowerment for its base. However, it’s detrimental to social cohesion, democratic stability, and global influence, fostering division and distrust while risking economic and institutional harm. Its moral alignment depends on whether you value its version of liberty or see it as lacking empathy. Long-term, MAGA’s success hinges on broadening its appeal and governing effectively, but its current trajectory suggests more polarization than unity.

If “good” means a stronger, more unified America for all, MAGA falls short due to its exclusionary rhetoric and institutional risks. If it means empowering a specific vision of America, it succeeds for its supporters but at the cost of broader stability. You decide which matters more.

 

Censorship!

But anyway, AI is trash for uses like this. It'll lie to your face and not even feel bad about it.

 

It's not trash. It's essentially the ultimate common thought or ideas of the dataset it was trained on. Most of these advanced foundation models are trained on human historical data plus recent data (including microblogs from Twitter, Facebook, whatever they can find). The human common thoughts and ideas have been very wrong before (flat earth), but seldom are they.

 

I'm confused. You say it is built on prevailing human common thought and then say it isn't trash.

 

It isn't usually trash. It can been and has been. What's confusing about that !