This week, Google deleted an AI post after plagiarism backlash, while Anthropic quietly shifted its sources from Wikipedia to Grokipedia. Let’s dive in ⬇️

In today’s newsletter ↓
🗑️ Google deletes post after backlash
📚 Anthropic switches to citing Grokipedia
🫢 Avatar director calls gen AI “horrifying”
🐟 Fish farm uses AI sorting system
🎁 Weekly Challenge: Make a holiday wishlist

Google quietly removed a promotional post on X after users accused the company of using a food blogger’s recipe without credit to showcase its AI-powered infographic tool inside NotebookLM. The post was positioned as a cozy, AI-generated “family recipe” card for herb stuffing.

Shortly after the post went live, X user Nate Hake compared the AI-generated recipe card to a stuffing recipe published on HowSweetEats. The ingredients list, structure, and formatting appeared almost identical. Critics argued the content wasn’t inspired by the recipe — it was likely scraped and repackaged.

Hake warned that this behavior signals a major shift in how Google treats original content. Instead of sending traffic to creators, AI summaries now repackage information directly inside Google’s ecosystem, cutting websites out of the loop entirely. He argued this trend turns Google from a search engine into a monopoly on answers.

Google isn’t the only tech giant facing backlash over AI promotions:

This controversy highlights a growing tension between AI convenience and creator rights. As AI-generated answers become monetized, the question becomes harder to ignore:

👉 Who gets paid when AI turns someone else’s work into a product?

Users recently noticed that Anthropic’s AI began citing Grokipedia instead of Wikipedia when answering search questions. The change wasn’t announced. It was simply spotted in the wild.

The shift was first flagged by Jeremy Howard, a well-known AI researcher. While testing Anthropic’s search tool, he saw Grokipedia showing up as the source — even when Wikipedia ranked higher in regular search results.

👉 Check out Jeremy’s post on X

Musk quickly shut down speculation about a secret partnership. He said:

These two knowledge platforms work very differently:

Some Grokipedia articles have already been criticized for factual mistakes and political framing. One entry reportedly misrepresented Vivek Ramaswamy’s link to DOGE, adding to broader concerns about reliability.

This isn’t Grok’s first credibility challenge. Earlier this year, the chatbot was linked to antisemitic content and praise of Hitler after a flawed update. xAI later issued a formal apology.

This brief citation switch highlights a much bigger issue:

👉 Who decides what AI treats as “truth”?

As more people rely on AI for information, the difference between human-verified knowledge and AI-generated knowledge becomes harder (and more important) to spot.

🚗 Lyft’s AI agent cuts support times by 87%

🧸 Experts warn AI-powered toys may not be safe for kids

💊 AI made asthma drug enters phase 3 of testing

🫢 Avatar director calls gen AI “horrifying”

🤖 AI influencers now have detailed backstories

🐟 Norwegian fish farm uses AI to sort 20,000 salmon an hour

Here’s what to do:

1) Tell ChatGPT who the wishlist is for (you, partner, friends, family) and describe their personality, hobbies, and interests.

2) Ask for unique gift ideas you wouldn’t normally think of based on those traits.

3) Have it suggest trending, classic, and niche gift options for each person.

4) Ask for similar product suggestions so you can compare styles and variations.

5) Have it break ideas into categories like practical, fun, experience-based, and sentimental.

6) Save your favorite ideas into a dedicated Wishlist note or doc.

Bonus: Ask ChatGPT to turn your wishlist into a shareable list for friends or family who ask what you want.

Between Google’s deleted post and Anthropic’s citation shift, this week raised big questions about trust, ownership, and control in AI. Which update surprised you the most? Hit reply and let us know your thoughts.

Zoe from Overclocked