{"id":669513,"date":"2025-05-16T05:31:50","date_gmt":"2025-05-16T02:31:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/en.buradabiliyorum.com\/xai-blames-groks-obsession-with-white-genocide-on-an-unauthorized-modification\/"},"modified":"2025-05-16T05:31:50","modified_gmt":"2025-05-16T02:31:50","slug":"xai-blames-groks-obsession-with-white-genocide-on-an-unauthorized-modification","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/buradabiliyorum.com\/en\/xai-blames-groks-obsession-with-white-genocide-on-an-unauthorized-modification\/","title":{"rendered":"xAI blames Grok’s obsession with white genocide on an ‘unauthorized modification’"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

xAI blamed an \u201cunauthorized modification\u201d for a bug in its AI-powered Grok chatbot that caused Grok to repeatedly refer to<\/a> \u201cwhite genocide in South Africa\u201d when invoked in certain contexts on X.<\/p>\n

On Wednesday, Grok began replying to dozens of posts on X with information about white genocide in South Africa, even in response to unrelated subjects. The strange replies stemmed from the X account for Grok, which responds to users with AI-generated posts whenever a person tags \u201c@grok.\u201d<\/p>\n

According to a post Thursday from xAI\u2019s official X account, a change was made Wednesday morning to the Grok bot\u2019s system prompt \u2014 the high-level instructions that guide the bot\u2019s behavior \u2014 that directed Grok to provide a \u201cspecific response\u201d on a \u201cpolitical topic.\u201d xAI says that the tweak \u201cviolated [its] internal policies and core values,\u201d and that the company has \u201cconducted a thorough investigation.\u201d <\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

We want to update you on an incident that happ<\/a>ened with our Grok response bot on X yesterday.<\/p>\n

What happened:
On May 14 at approximately 3:15 AM PST, an unauthorized modification was made to the Grok response bot’s prompt on X. This change, which directed Grok to provide a\u2026<\/p>\n

\u2014 xAI (@xai) May 16, 2025<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n<\/figure>\n

It\u2019s the second time xAI has publicly acknowledged an unauthorized change to Grok\u2019s code caused the AI to respond in controversial ways.<\/p>\n

In February, Grok briefly censored unflattering mentions of Donald Trump and Elon Musk, the billionaire founder of xAI and owner of X. Igor Babuschkin, an xAI engineering lead,\u00a0said that Grok had been instructed by a rogue employee<\/a> to ignore sources that mentioned Musk or Trump spreading misinformation, and that xAI reverted the change as soon as users began pointing it out.<\/p>\n

xAI said on Thursday that it\u2019s going to make several changes to prevent similar incidents from occurring in the future. <\/p>\n

Beginning today, xAI will publish Grok\u2019s system prompts on GitHub as well as a changelog. The company says it\u2019ll also \u201cput in place additional checks and measures\u201d to ensure that xAI employees can\u2019t modify the system prompt without review and establish a \u201c24\/7 monitoring team to respond to incidents with Grok\u2019s answers that are not caught by automated systems.\u201d<\/p>\n

Despite Musk\u2019s frequent warnings of the dangers of\u00a0AI<\/a>\u00a0gone<\/a>\u00a0unchecked<\/a>, xAI has a poor AI safety track record. A recent report<\/a>\u00a0found that Grok would undress photos of women when asked. The chatbot can also be\u00a0considerably more crass\u00a0than AI like Google\u2019s Gemini and ChatGPT, cursing without much restraint to speak of.<\/p>\n

A study by SaferAI, a nonprofit aiming to improve the accountability of AI labs, found xAI ranks poorly on safety among its peers, owing to its\u00a0\u201cvery weak\u201d risk management practices<\/a>. Earlier this month, xAI missed a self-imposed deadline\u00a0to publish a finalized AI safety framework.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n