Side N
Grok Build Shipped Whole Repos to xAI's Cloud
Which sources back which section of this article, and what its evidence base looks like.
Which sources back which section
| Section | Sources behind it |
|---|---|
| What Happened | cereblab, the wire-level analysis (gist); cereblab, the public reproduction harness; the cereblab.com tracker; The Register, 14 Jul 2026; The Hacker News, 14 Jul 2026; The Register, 16 Jul 2026; Peter Dedene, on X; SpaceXAI, on X; DevOps.com, 15 May 2026; Dataconomy, 7 Jul 2026 |
| Timeline | Dataconomy, 7 Jul 2026; DevOps.com, 15 May 2026; cereblab, the wire-level analysis (gist); cereblab, the public reproduction harness; the cereblab.com tracker; Peter Dedene, on X; The Register, 14 Jul 2026; The Hacker News, 14 Jul 2026; SpaceXAI, on X; The Register, 16 Jul 2026; Wikipedia, “Grok (chatbot)” |
| The Argument | cereblab, the wire-level analysis (gist); cereblab, the public reproduction harness; the cereblab.com tracker |
| What Others Add | cereblab, the wire-level analysis (gist); the cereblab.com tracker; The Hacker News, 14 Jul 2026; The Register, 14 Jul 2026; The Register, 16 Jul 2026; SpaceXAI, on X |
| Conclusion | cereblab, the wire-level analysis (gist); cereblab, the public reproduction harness; the cereblab.com tracker; The Register, 14 Jul 2026; The Register, 16 Jul 2026; SpaceXAI, on X; Dataconomy, 7 Jul 2026 |
What the evidence base looks like
- 11Sources behind this article
- 5Sections, every one of them sourced
- 11Read directly, at the source itself
- 3From the researcher whose finding the article reports
| What the source is | How many | How they were read |
|---|---|---|
| The researcher who made the finding | 3 | All three read directly; for the reproduction harness, its README in full, but not the repository’s own history, and the harness was not run |
| News and trade reporting | 5 | All five read in full, one of them published before the finding |
| The company the article is about | 1 | Its own post read directly, and checked against a press quotation of it in full |
| An independent developer | 1 | His own post read directly; no artefact attached to it |
| Reference work | 1 | The relevant section read directly; used only to cross-check two dates carried by other sources |
Reliable
Reliable, but with an interestWorth believing and reliableWeak on both, and used with careHonest, but thin
Worth believing