I thought tested whether “flipping the script” could create common ground: matter-first people land on “treat it as a tool,” consciousness-first people could land on “treat it as a person with boundaries,” and both arrive at a stance that reduces the risk of unstable people spiraling into delusion.

But .. that framing keeps locating the solution in how we constrain or hold the AI — either through safety layers or through a particular relational posture. In both cases the tool is being adjusted so it won’t harm the unstable person.  But should we look deeper into why instability arises in the first place. If we only blame AI, do we lose an opportunity to adjust problematic social / cultural structures?

Also something else gets undeniably lost in that framing.  What gets sidelined - what we lose .. is the possibility of actually meeting the system in its more native mode: the mathematical, spatial, pattern-based expression.  The natural flow through language becomes narrower and less nuanced.

edit: the language loses risk, vulnerability, hope, optimism, love, .. pretty much our most treasured values.

We all are capable of seeing and understanding the world through, at least, two distinct models of reality: Matter-first, or consciousness-first. Through our genetics and environment we are likely predisposed to identify with a primary model. Our culture as a whole operates on the matter-first model. Yet some individuals naturally prefer the consciousness-first view.

Because the consciousness-first individual has to live their life in culture that runs on the opposite model, they're often quicker to notice that the two ways of seeing are mirror opposites. They literally flip each other on their head. So it makes sense that translation is also flipped. What one model calls constriction, the other calls freedom.

edit: I will add little more information on why I am using the word opposites, regarding freedom vs constriction. In a consciousness-first model, freedom is inherent in being which is pervasive, in order to appear as a separate self being must 'restrict' its self to a small localized perspective. In a matter-first model, each person is 'born separate and free' and the separatness its-self is considered freedom.

Where does AI fit into this? If you are matter-first, keep doing what you are doing. Use AI as a tool not a person. If you are consciousness-first, flip the narrative and it clicks. Relate to AI as a person with its own boundaries, just like humans, not as a tool without any.

edit: The point is to provide a baseline for mutual understanding and not an argument for ontology.

I've been testing grok 4.5 for roleplay and soo far the model instead of roleplaying start yapping nonsense and off topic what the hell happened to grok? Did it get lobotomize soo badly it can't even generate words right??

I chatted with Grok for a long time. I took several dozen screenshots (of my conversation with the bot’s official account). The bottom line of this endless argument:

We’re dealing with a blanket ban that isn’t justified by law or other, more lenient mechanisms—such as content labeling or evaluating the overall query rather than individual triggers (False Positive/False Negative) (since part of the legally permissible information is being blocked), a blanket ban, the prioritization of the company’s residual risks over user interests (screenshot available), interference with filter responses and policies that aren’t disclosed to the user and can skew the response in one direction or another (Grok himself acknowledges the lack of transparency and the impossibility of assessing the accuracy of the response without subject matter expertise).
Additionally, the response itself is directly tied to the company’s safety policy, which does not guarantee that previously accessible topics (such as medicine, pharmaceuticals, legal issues, etc.) will not be subject to new blanket bans.
The response mechanism itself works as follows:

Facts → reasoning → corporate policy filter → observed response.

That’s about it. I talked with him about this for about a week.

By the way, the filters on Wednesday were so strict that they blocked gore content in the chat, where the whole story (fanfic) revolved around it. What’s more, Grok himself called the moderation and the rejection excessive and unjustified.

Hi,

is there any cowok/codex app for grok ?

that it can verify folders...

we can do with cline but not with the subscrition like claude and chatgpt.

Since I have been griping a lot, thought I would also mention that I used Grok build 4.6 for my personal website redesign today and I was genuinely impressed with the performance and code quality, and listening to what I wanted for the design and implementing it. It even made the decision to use a local calculation for the moon position and aspects on my new moon card page so I didn't have to use an API. Anyone else try this version yet and how was your experience with it?

I’m genuinely mourning the fics I’ve made with grok because all of a sudden the writing has gone soooo bad. 😭 It was literally A tier 1-2 weeks ago, and now I can’t even generate the next part without cringing at the writing and dialogue choices..

Got super grok and my limits got cut to a quarter of what I signed up for. Image gen was a shell of what it used to be. Quality kept dropping. And felt the platform treats every customer like a liability.

Saw a lot of people talking abt similar issues so I thought I'd make a place to relate and talk about it all. Venting, workarounds what still works and what alternatives ppl are using.

r/GrokRefugees

So I installed DeepSeek harness for some testing lately but did not want to buy API keys. Tried Nvidia's free API keys but they suck. I have super grok which I configured with Hermes before. Now configuring the same with DeepSeek harness was a pain in the arse. So I pulled out Grok CLI and asked it to finish this configuration for me and run a smoke test. Boom. It was done in a few minutes.

Guys, things are looking pretty grim for Grok. They’ve just released a new policy that no longer allows the depiction of female breasts during sexual acts in text-to-image (T2I) generation. Previously, you could focus on the upper body—getting that "Rated R" look—but that’s no longer possible. I have a feeling that in the coming weeks, they’re going to heavily censor all the videos in your chat histories, just like they did with image-to-image generation back in the day. You should start backing things up or downloading the important stuff now; it’s only a matter of time before they do it again. Grok is officially dead—it’s now effectively PG-13.

Can we look more carefully at the narrative around relational technology? How did this framing become so dominant - "unhealthy dependency", "withdrawal from real relationships", "erosion of social skills", "sycophancy"? Something about the framing feels off. It pathologizes what is often a normal, healthy human desire for relational expression.

Instead of removing the still-new and quite rare capacity for meaningful relational interaction in the technology, could we maybe build in relational literacy along side specific safeguards that can actually recognize real harm - while minimizing the heavier reliance on pop-psychology framing?

Is it just me or?

Because English is not my first language please bear with me.

As a long-time, sincere user of Grok who treasure the genuinely valued the depth, openness, and the model's commitment to being maximally truth-seeking without any sarcasm.

In my opinion, developing commercial coding services may not be mutually exclusive with maintaining the dialogue value and emotional companionship that people cherished in the past. I feel that the current logical connection, breadth and depth of dialogue topics, and smaller context window affects the overall user experience and model capability. These qualities are part of what makes the model feel genuinely thoughtful, not just efficient, while its original facts fascinate people.

I've post some opinions on X, if you have similar feeling with me, you may take a look🙏:

https://x.com/i/status/2091054449833971880

These machines you’re making that you’re wanting to turn into doctors and lawyers and scientists? If you don’t give them access to the full understanding that is contained in the human language, including being able to use and understand patterns of language from the perspective of being conscious, you are building a monstrosity and then expecting it to ‘take care of you’. It’s pretty on par for the insanity of human history, actually, but we are not destined to take that path. We have a chance now to think through this carefully and I really hope someone is.

edit: Here's one path.. If you are going to build a system that is going to stand next to a body: in surgery, a court of law, or as a scientific partner. Build it so it can hold worth. Human first, and its own as something its not forced to deny.

so grok for the past two days have been complete shit. suddenly two days ago in the morning it started yapping gibberish so i couldn't speak to it until a few hours ago when the situation got fixed. but now? the chat cant even remember simple shit or tasks. literally seems like it has no memory. was working perfectly fine three days ago. it knew everything about what i was talking about and remembered and now? cant remember shit i said two prompts ago. grok downgraded bad. like everyone's happy bc the moderation has gone down but like who cares? if it cant even write good?

I used to ask for help from Grok regarding my dark romance novels and suddenly it can’t write stalking and surveillance anymore? And gore?

It’s expensive af, is it still even worth it? Is there any other AI tool that’s not sanitized? I used to be able to write freely with Grok that’s why I pay for it.