9 comments

[ 2.8 ms ] story [ 30.2 ms ] thread
Not open source as it has a non-commercial restrictions, among it's other terms I didn't even bother to read.
I’m not surprised, lots of people have stopped buying the model 3. In 6 months they might as well give it away.
On one hand it’s an old, obsolete model.

On the other none of the big-name US labs released their old models, even when obsolete, like gpt 3.5 or claude pre-3.5. All we got are some unusable safetyslop like openai OSS that was worse than existing comparable chinese models on the day they released. Google’s gemma was slightly better, but also hardly exciting.

So… go Elon? It’s not much but it’s something, and who knows, maybe it’ll somehow percolate into other companies to release something that is actually good.

The license is pretty hostile, though.

Smoke and mirrors...hostile license, old model and it's open weight and not open source. Probably the only reason to do this to Elon to be able to say to the other frontier labs: see, we are open!
The main use of this I could see is transparency. I imagine you could test prompts and increase your confidence the released system prompts are actually the ones in use.

Also, assuming they continue to release their old models, I suppose this could be used to get more insight on what caused the MechaHitler incident.

Grok is bad for the world. xAI’s data center is producing a huge amount of pollution in Memphis [0]. Additionally, Elon Musk’s attempts to create an AI that is not “woke” have led to it spewing far-right conspiracy theories [1], although generally for short periods of time before fixes are released.

[0]: https://www.selc.org/news/resistance-against-elon-musks-xai-...

[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/may/14/elon-musk...

No, the "Grok Community License Agreement" no way shape or form open source. It's not even close. Just more open-source washing marketing BS.