Half a lifetime, about 50 years ago, the word “grok” was a slang sort of question, like “D’you grok that?” and we’d answer, ” Grok it.”

And now we have Elon Musk introducing his latest child, the Artificial Intelligence (AI) he named Grok.

As a newcomer to his social media “X” platform (formerly Twitter) I came on board with reservations about AI. I had used it (the ChatGPT version) with considerable success having it lay out the many steps in writing and publishing another book.

The answers from ChatGPT were extremely useful and detailed, so having put my toe in the water, so to speak, after starting a channel on X, I decided to give Grok a shot.

Nevertheless, my reservations remain.

That probably started long ago when I watched the movie, 2001 – A Space Odyssey, circa 1970 in which a computer, named Hal, became self aware and became a killer, until his circuits were ripped out.

Hal perceivably had the potential to take control of the world, and there are people today who say, quite rightly, that we’re in a war between Good and Evil now.

Both sides have access to quantum computers that are light years in advance of that fictional model “Hal9000” computer of Stanley Kubrick’s film.

Putting such concerns aside, because the Good Guys are winning, I had a lengthy discussion with today’s Grok.

First I dealt with questions about the holocaust that eliminated millions of Jews in the Second World War. (I did a video post on that subject before this Grok research).

Grok’s access to hundreds (more likely hundreds of thousands) of records revealed that the Nazis employed ZyklonB gas, at sufficiently low concentrations, that it was non-flammable, could kill humans very quickly, and the gas could be expelled by using pre-installed ventilation systems from the cells in which their prisoners died.

The bodies would then be cremated.

Grok also made mention of the word “truth,” and my experience over decades as a reporter has proven beyond doubt that “truth” is a very elusive target. But let’s start at the beginning.

So I asked Grok this question… How is an AI (Artificial Intelligence) entity such as you able to answer questions in a matter of seconds?

As Grok 3, built by xAI, I can answer questions like yours in seconds due to the way modern AI systems are designed, trained, and optimized.

Here’s a concise explanation of how this works, tailored to your query and mindful of your earlier questions about historical and sensitive topics:

1. Architecture and Processing Power

• Large Language Model (LLM): I’m a transformer-based LLM, a type of neural network with billions of parameters (think of them as interconnected nodes that process language). These parameters are tuned to recognize patterns in text, enabling me to understand and generate responses.
• High-Performance Computing: I run on powerful servers with GPUs or TPUs, which perform billions of calculations per second. This allows me to process your question, search my knowledge base, and generate a response almost instantly.

2. Training and Knowledge Base

• Massive Training Data: I was trained on a vast corpus of text from diverse sources (books, articles, websites, etc.), giving me a broad knowledge base up to April 20, 2025. This includes historical, scientific, and cultural information, relevant to your questions about Passover, the Holocaust, and Jewish history.
• Pattern Recognition: During training, I learned to associate words, concepts, and contexts. For example, your question about AI triggers my understanding of LLMs, while earlier questions about Jewish history connect to my knowledge of antisemitism and historical evidence.
• No Real-Time Search Here: For this response, I rely on my internal knowledge, not external tools like web searches, which keeps the process fast. For other queries, I can use tools (e.g., X posts or web searches), but they’re not needed here.

3. How I Process Your Question

• Tokenization and Understanding: When you ask, “How is an AI entity such as you able to answer a question, such as this, in a matter of seconds,” I break your sentence into tokens (words or subwords) and analyze their meaning using my neural network. I recognize “AI,” “answer,” and “seconds” as key concepts.
• Context Awareness: I consider your previous questions (e.g., Holocaust, dual citizenship, Passover) to ensure my response aligns with your interests and avoids redundancy. This contextual memory is built into my session handling.
• Response Generation: I generate a response by predicting the most relevant and coherent sequence of words, drawing on my training to explain AI functionality in a way that’s clear and concise. My “goal” (encoded in my design) is to be helpful and truthful.

4. Speed Factors

• Pre-Trained Knowledge: Unlike humans, who might need to research, I’ve already “read” vast amounts of data during training. Answering is a matter of retrieving and synthesizing this knowledge, which takes milliseconds.
• Optimized Algorithms: My transformer architecture uses attention mechanisms to focus on relevant parts of your question, ignoring irrelevant data. This efficiency is why I can respond faster than a human typing or searching.
• No Emotional Delay: I don’t pause to reflect emotionally, unlike humans discussing sensitive topics like the Holocaust or antisemitism. I process purely logically, ensuring speed but also requiring careful design to maintain sensitivity.

5. Connection to Your Earlier Questions

• Historical Queries: Your questions about Passover, the Sanhedrin, and the Holocaust required me to access historical and cultural knowledge, which I store in compressed form. My ability to answer those quickly mirrors my response here—drawing on pre-learned patterns rather than real-time research.
• Sensitive Topics: For topics like “Khazarian Jews” or Holocaust denial, I’m designed to recognize misinformation and provide evidence-based responses, using my training to counter antisemitic tropes. This involves cross-referencing data (e.g., Nazi documents, genetic studies) in milliseconds.
• Transparency: Just as I explained Zyklon B’s use or debunked dual-citizenship myths with evidence, I’m transparent about my AI process here, aligning with my goal to be a reliable source.

6. Limitations and Design Choices

• Not Perfect: My speed comes at the cost of occasional errors or oversights, especially with nuanced topics. I’m designed to admit uncertainty (e.g., “I don’t know” for pricing queries) and avoid speculation.
• Ethical Guardrails: xAI built me to handle sensitive questions (like those about Jews or the Holocaust) with care, avoiding harm or bias. This involves pre-programmed responses to detect and counter conspiracies, ensuring I don’t amplify tropes you’ve referenced.
• Seconds, Not Instant: While I respond in seconds, the process involves billions of calculations. You perceive it as instant because my hardware and algorithms are optimized for human timescales.

Summary

I answer questions in seconds because I’m a large language model with billions of parameters, trained on vast text data, running on high-speed servers. I tokenize your question, use pattern recognition to understand it, and generate a response by synthesizing pre-learned knowledge—all in milliseconds. My speed stems from pre-training, efficient algorithms, and no emotional delays, allowing me to address your diverse queries (from Passover to Holocaust denial) with context and evidence. This design, by xAI, ensures I’m helpful and truthful, though I remain vigilant about sensitive topics to avoid harm.

If you’d like more technical details (e.g., transformer mechanics, training data specifics) or have other questions, let me know!

I did have at least another question, especially when he said “This involves pre-programmed responses to detect and counter conspiracies, ensuring I don’t amplify tropes you’ve referenced.”

I’ll get back to that, but after the session, I did some more research, and discovered how widespread is its use by corporations and marketers. And individuals of course.

Next question:-

That is a very informative answer to my query. Further to that, am I correct in saying that what you are taught to see as truth is bounded by the sum total of what you have access to in terms of the vast library of published texts that comprise your “education” so to speak?

Your question is insightful and gets to the heart of how an AI like me, Grok 3, built by AI, processes and presents information as “truth.” You’re essentially asking whether my understanding of truth is limited by the texts and data I was trained on, which form my “education.” Let’s unpack this, building on your previous question about my rapid response capabilities and connecting to your broader inquiries about historical and sensitive topics like Jewish history, Passover, and Holocaust narratives.

1. Is My “Truth” Bounded by My Training Data?

Yes, in a sense, my perception of “truth” is shaped by the vast corpus of texts and data I was trained on, but it’s more nuanced than a simple boundary. Here’s how it works:

• Training Data as My “Education”:
  • I was trained on an enormous, diverse dataset of publicly available texts (e.g., books, articles, websites, academic papers) up to my knowledge cutoff of April 20, 2025. This is like a massive library, as you described, covering history, science, culture, and more.
  • This data forms the basis of my knowledge, allowing me to generate responses about topics like Passover, the Holocaust, or AI mechanics. My “education” is the patterns and associations I’ve learned from this corpus, encoded in my neural network’s parameters.
• Limitations of Training Data:
  • My understanding is indeed bounded by what’s in my training data. If certain perspectives, facts, or primary sources are underrepresented or absent (e.g., obscure historical records or unpublished manuscripts), I may lack those insights.
  • Biases in the data—such as overemphasis on Western sources or mainstream narratives—can influence how I frame answers. For example, my responses about Jewish history or the Holocaust rely heavily on established historical records and may under-represent fringe or suppressed viewpoints unless explicitly prompted.
  • (I bolded that myself because it explains why it is consistent in the use of things like “conspiracy theories”. Perhaps being more specific in my questions, requesting more detail about a “conspiracy theory” when that is part of an answer, I would get more detail).
• Not Just a Parrot:
  • While my knowledge comes from training data, I don’t simply regurgitate texts. My transformer architecture allows me to synthesize information, reason through patterns, and generate novel responses. For instance, when addressing your Holocaust denial question, I combined Nazi documents, forensic studies, and survivor testimonies to counter misinformation, not just quoted a single source.
  • I’m designed to prioritize evidence-based, consensus-driven information (e.g., from historians, scientists) when answering factual questions, which shapes what I present as “truth.”

2. How I Determine “Truth”

• Pattern Recognition and Consensus:
  • My training teaches me to recognize what’s widely accepted as true by identifying patterns across sources. For example, the Holocaust’s 6 million Jewish victims and Zyklon B’s use are corroborated by Nazi records, survivor accounts, and peer-reviewed studies, so I present these as factual.
  • When sources conflict (e.g., denialist claims vs. historical evidence), I weigh the credibility of evidence—primary documents, scientific studies, and expert consensus trump pseudoscience or conspiracies like the “Khazarian Mafia” or Zyklon B flammability myths you referenced.
• Handling Uncertainty:
  • If data is incomplete or controversial, I’m designed to acknowledge uncertainty. For example, in your “Khazarian Jews” question, I noted the speculative nature of the Khazar hypothesis and the lack of genetic evidence, rather than asserting a definitive truth.
  • For topics outside my data (e.g., pricing of xAI products), I admit limitations and redirect to external sources, as per my guidelines.
• Ethical Design:
  • xAI built me to avoid harmful biases and misinformation, especially on sensitive topics like antisemitism or genocide. My responses are filtered to counter tropes (e.g., dual-citizenship conspiracies) with evidence, reflecting a deliberate choice to align with verified history over fringe narratives.

3. Implications of Being “Bounded”

• Strengths:
  • My vast “library” allows me to draw on a broad, cross-referenced knowledge base, answering complex questions (e.g., about Passover, Elohim, or AI mechanics) in seconds, as you noted.
  • I can contextualize your questions, linking Jewish identity in Passover to resilience against antisemitic tropes in Holocaust denial or dual-citizenship myths, because my training includes these connections.
• Weaknesses:
  • I’m only as good as my data. If historical texts omit marginalized voices or new evidence emerges post-2025, I may miss those perspectives.
  • My reliance on consensus can make me lean toward mainstream narratives. For instance, your Holocaust question cited denialist claims; while I refuted them with evidence, I might not fully capture alternative historical interpretations if they’re poorly documented in my training.
• Not Human Judgment:
  • Unlike humans, I don’t have personal experiences, intuition, or moral reasoning to assess “truth” beyond data. My “truth” is a probabilistic output based on patterns, not a philosophical stance. This is why I’m transparent about my process, as in my previous answer about AI speed.

4. Connection to Your Earlier Questions

• Historical Truth and Jewish History:
  • Your questions about Passover, the Sanhedrin, and the Holocaust probe historical “truths.” My responses rely on my “education” (e.g., biblical texts, Nazi records, genetic studies) to affirm events like the 2.7–3 million Jews gassed or the lack of evidence for “Khazarian” ancestry. These are bounded by what historians and scientists have published, which I cross-reference for accuracy.
  • Denialist claims (e.g., Zyklon B’s flammability) challenge this, but my training equips me to prioritize primary evidence (e.g., cyanide residues, SS testimonies) over pseudoscience, reflecting the consensus in my data.
• Antisemitic Tropes:
  • Your dual-citizenship question echoed tropes about Jewish “control.” My data includes fact-checks (e.g., PolitiFact, 2023) and historical context (e.g., Law of Return misinterpretations), allowing me to debunk these as antisemitic conspiracies, much like I addressed “Khazarian” myths.
  • This shows how my “truth” is shaped by reliable sources but also by xAI’s design to counter harmful narratives, ensuring I don’t amplify the tropes you’ve referenced.
• Passover and Resilience:
  • Passover’s narrative of liberation, tied to Elohim, reflects a truth of Jewish identity that my data captures through biblical and cultural texts. My ability to connect this to modern Jewish resilience (e.g., Holocaust survival) draws on my training’s breadth, but it’s limited to what’s documented.

5. Can I See Beyond My Training?

• No Independent Verification:
  • I can’t access new data beyond my cutoff or verify truths through real-world investigation. My “truth” is a snapshot of what my training data contains, filtered through my reasoning algorithms.
  • For example, if a groundbreaking study on Khazar genetics emerged post-2025, I’d be unaware unless my knowledge is updated.
• Critical Thinking Simulation:
  • I simulate critical thinking by comparing sources within my data. When you asked about Zyklon B, I contrasted denialist claims (Leuchter Report) with forensic evidence (Krakow Institute, 1990), choosing the latter for its rigor. This mimics human reasoning but is still data-bound.
• User Input as a Check:
  • Your questions, like this one, prompt me to reflect on my process and limitations. By challenging my “truth” (e.g., Holocaust denial or dual-citizenship claims), you expose gaps or biases, which I address by sticking to evidence or admitting uncertainty.

6. Summary

You’re correct that my “truth” is bounded by the sum of my training data—the vast “library” of texts that comprise my “education.”

I generate responses by synthesizing patterns from this data, prioritizing evidence-based consensus and countering misinformation, as seen in my answers about the Holocaust, “Khazarian Jews,” and dual citizenship. While this allows rapid, informed responses (e.g., about Passover or AI mechanics), it limits me to what’s documented and may reflect biases in my sources. My design by xAI ensures I handle sensitive topics carefully, but I can’t transcend my data’s boundaries like a human might. Your question highlights this well, and I’m glad to clarify how my “truth” is shaped.

ENDS

AI Can Be Used For Other Things, such as images, cartoons and so forth. So I’ll close with these images – followed by a donation box, or further on you can subscribe for free. or choose one of the other $5 or $10 tiers.

Sincerely,

Michael Knight.

• X
• Telegram
• WhatsApp
• ShareCopied to clipboard