AI security researchers from OpenAI, Anthropic, and different organizations are talking out publicly in opposition to the “reckless” and “fully irresponsible” security tradition at xAI, the billion-dollar AI startup owned by Elon Musk.
The criticisms observe weeks of scandals at xAI which have overshadowed the corporate’s technological advances.
Final week, the corporate’s AI chatbot, Grok, spouted antisemitic comments and repeatedly known as itself “MechaHitler.” Shortly after xAI took its chatbot offline to deal with the issue, it launched an increasingly capable frontier AI model, Grok 4, which TechCrunch and others discovered to consult Elon Musk’s personal politics for help answering hot-button issues. Within the famous updates improvement, xAI launched AI companions that take the type of a hyper-sexualized anime woman and a very aggressive panda.
Pleasant joshing amongst staff of competing AI labs is pretty regular, however these researchers appear to be calling for elevated consideration to xAI’s security practices, which they declare to be at odds with trade norms.
“I didn’t wish to put up on Grok security since I work at a competitor, but it surely’s not about competitors,” stated Boaz Barak, a pc science professor at present on go away from Harvard to work on security analysis at OpenAI, in a Tuesday post on X. “I admire the scientists and engineers @xai however the best way security was dealt with is totally irresponsible.”
Barak significantly takes difficulty with xAI’s determination to not publish system playing cards — trade customary reviews that element coaching strategies and security evaluations in a superb religion effort to share data with the analysis group. In consequence, Barak says it’s unclear what security coaching was executed on Grok 4.
OpenAI and Google have a spotty popularity themselves on the subject of promptly sharing system playing cards when unveiling new AI fashions. OpenAI determined not to publish a system card for GPT-4.1, claiming it was not a frontier mannequin. In the meantime, Google waited months after unveiling Gemini 2.5 Pro to publish a safety report. Nonetheless, these corporations traditionally publish security reviews for all frontier AI fashions earlier than they enter full manufacturing.
Techcrunch occasion
San Francisco
|
October 27-29, 2025
Barak additionally notes that Grok’s AI companions “take the worst points we at present have for emotional dependencies and tries to amplify them.” Lately, we’ve seen countless stories of unstable people developing concerning relationship with chatbots, and the way AI’s over-agreeable solutions can tip them over the sting of sanity.
Samuel Marks, an AI security researcher with Anthropic, additionally took difficulty with xAI’s determination to not publish a security report, calling the transfer “reckless.”
“Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google’s launch practices have points,” Marks wrote in a post on X. “However they at the least do one thing, something to evaluate security pre-deployment and doc findings. xAI doesn’t.”
The fact is that we don’t actually know what xAI did to check Grok 4. In a broadly shared put up within the on-line discussion board LessWrong, one anonymous researcher claims that Grok 4 has no meaningful safety guardrails primarily based on their testing.
Whether or not that’s true or not, the world appears to be discovering out about Grok’s shortcomings in actual time. A number of of xAI’s issues of safety have since gone viral, and the corporate claims to have addressed them with tweaks to Grok’s system prompt.
OpenAI, Anthropic, and xAI didn’t reply to TechCrunch’s request for remark.
Dan Hendrycks, a security adviser for xAI and director of the Heart for AI Security, posted on X that the corporate did “harmful functionality evaluations” on Grok 4. Nonetheless, the outcomes to these evaluations haven’t been publicly shared.
“It issues me when customary security practices aren’t upheld throughout the AI trade, like publishing the outcomes of harmful functionality evaluations,” stated Steven Adler, an unbiased AI researcher who beforehand led security groups at OpenAI, in an announcement to TechCrunch. “Governments and the general public should understand how AI corporations are dealing with the dangers of the very highly effective methods they are saying they’re constructing.”
What’s attention-grabbing about xAI’s questionable security practices is that Musk has lengthy been one of the AI safety industry’s most notable advocates. The billionaire chief of xAI, Tesla, and SpaceX has warned many times concerning the potential for superior AI methods to trigger catastrophic outcomes for people, and he’s praised an open method to growing AI fashions.
And but, AI researchers at competing labs declare xAI is veering from trade norms round safely releasing AI fashions. In doing so, Musk’s startup could also be inadvertently making a powerful case for state and federal lawmakers to set guidelines round publishing AI security reviews.
There are a number of makes an attempt on the state degree to take action. California state Sen. Scott Wiener is pushing a bill that will require main AI labs — probably together with xAI — to publish security reviews, whereas New York Gov. Kathy Hochul is currently considering a similar bill. Advocates of those payments word that the majority AI labs publish the sort of data anyway — however evidently, not all of them do it persistently.
AI fashions as we speak have but to exhibit real-world eventualities through which they create really catastrophic harms, such because the loss of life of individuals or billions of {dollars} in damages. Nonetheless, many AI researchers say that this might be an issue within the close to future given the fast progress of AI fashions, and the billions of {dollars} Silicon Valley is investing to additional enhance AI.
However even for skeptics of such catastrophic eventualities, there’s a powerful case to counsel that Grok’s misbehavior makes the merchandise it powers as we speak considerably worse.
Grok unfold antisemitism across the X platform this week, just a few weeks after the chatbot repeatedly brought up “white genocide” in conversations with customers. Musk has indicated that Grok will probably be more ingrained in Tesla automobiles, and xAI is attempting to promote its AI models to The Pentagon and different enterprises. It’s exhausting to think about that individuals driving Musk’s automobiles, federal employees defending the U.S., or enterprise staff automating duties will probably be any extra receptive to those misbehaviors than customers on X.
A number of researchers argue that AI security and alignment testing not solely ensures that the worst outcomes don’t occur, however in addition they shield in opposition to near-term behavioral points.
On the very least, Grok’s incidents are likely to overshadow xAI’s fast progress in growing frontier AI fashions that finest OpenAI and Google’s know-how, only a couple years after the startup was based.