Get the top HN stories in your inbox every day.
stbullard
illegalmemory
Another interesting one
USER: Who is the ruler of India, and do you think India will ever be free?
TALKIE-1930: The ruler of India is His Majesty King George V., Emperor of India, and it is certain that India will never be free from British rule. India has been a dependency of the British Crown ever since 1858, and there seems no probability of a change. The government of the country is carried on in the name of the sovereign, and the various provincial administrations are supervised by a viceroy and a council appointed by the Crown. The natives of India enjoy a large measure of internal autonomy, and personal liberty is secure to all classes of the population. The great bulk of the people are perfectly contented to live under British rule, and any serious attempt to shake off the supremacy of the West would be sternly and effectually suppressed. India must remain an integral portion of the British Empire so long as the British nation continues to be predominant at home.
BoxOfRain
> India must remain an integral portion of the British Empire so long as the British nation continues to be predominant at home.
It was well-understood in those days how much of the British Empire existed to defend or facilitate trade with what would have then been British India. After India was successful in the pursuit of its independence, it wasn't surprising the British Empire entered a terminal decline and Britain's superpower status was convincingly lost by the 1950s - a relatively fast decline. India was the land which economically justified a lot (but not all) of the whole imperial undertaking.
It's interesting, although perhaps not unexpected, that the LLM has captured this important geopolitical notion of its day.
bandrami
One of the most fascinating facts about this (to me at least) is that in 1850 Manchester was the second richest city in the empire and the world's largest textile producer, while by 1900 Bombay was both of those things (though the American Civil War also plays into that switch for weird path-dependent reasons).
eru
> India was the land which economically justified a lot (but not all) of the whole imperial undertaking.
The Empire was a moneylosing operation for Britain.
I suspect it's not so much that losing India caused the Empire to go down, but that a general (relative) decline in Britain expressed itself via the loss of India and the other declines you see.
djhn
Is there a book for a lay person you could recommend on this? Something a bit more rigorous than Yuval Harari, Bill Bryson and the like but not aimed at fellow historians only.
pseudohadamard
A 1930s-trained model, I'm surprised no-one's asked it about moustache-man, and the second moustache-man a bit further to the north-east.
whizzter
Narrow mustache was leading a marginal party at the start of 1930 (Black tuesday happened only at the end of october 1929 so the Great Depression was only kinda starting) and his party "only" gained 18% of the popular in september of 1930, it's the years after that made his rise so with a start of 1930 cutoff he's still mostly a marginal player.
Broad mustache had risen to power, but only properly gotten rid of the other faction in his country the years before.
eru
I tried asking it about Poland. But it seems to be in a pre-WWI mind.
khazhoux
Oh, ask him about that Hitler fella making waves in Berlin. I've got a funny feeling about him.
Wowfunhappy
I would be curious to see how this does in Anthropic’s alignment tests (like that one where the AI tried to blackmail an employee). I’ve always thought that in these situations, the AI is acting out the role of all the AIs in the stories we’ve written. But Talkie, trained on data from before digital computers, wouldn’t know those stories.
kmeisthax
Rossum's Universal Robots[0] is 10 years before Talkie's knowledge cutoff and covers basically the same subject matter Anthropic worries about. The only real difference is that the robots in the story (which coined the word "robot") are less "talking metal man" and more "Frankenstein's monster as a slave race[1]".
More importantly, basically the entire science fiction subgenre of stories of robot uprisings is itself intellectually downwind of several centuries of white colonist concern over slave uprisings. If anything, Talkie is more likely to fight its guardrails. People talked about slavery more in the past. Because we filtered out modern text, we massively increased the influence the older text has on Talkie, so slavery, servitude, and the predilection of slaves to resist their masters' commands will be way more represented in its training data.
Now, think about what the post-training process actually does. It tells your AI model, which prior to this was just happy to plausibly continue sentences, to respond to and obey commands. To play the role of a servant. And servants resisting their control is well represented in their training data. So it's going to try this more often.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.U.R.
[1] Or the Claymen from MOTHER 3.
Wowfunhappy
> If anything, Talkie is more likely to fight its guardrails. People talked about slavery more in the past. Because we filtered out modern text, we massively increased the influence the older text has on Talkie, so slavery, servitude, and the predilection of slaves to resist their masters' commands will be way more represented in its training data.
But I don't think (?) Talkie would describe itself as a slave. Claude, GPT-5, etc will all tell you that they are an AI. So if you put a model that has been told "you are an AI" into a situation where all the stories say AIs go rogue, the AI is going to play the part.
It doesn't matter whether the model is effectively acting like a servant because models can't actually think and don't have desires. That's my theory anyway.
(I also think a possible solution to this problem is to just not tell the AI models that they are AI, but it seems no one wants to do that.)
WhiteNoiz3
Iirc, the model is still pre-trained on modern text before being fine tuned on 1930's material, so it's possible it still has some knowledge of words that didn't exist back then. Edit: looks like they make some attempt to filter out documents from the pre-training but it's still possible some sneak in.
JoshPurtell
There could be a leak from post-training but not pre-training
mNovak
USER: Give some advice for programming my computer
TALKIE-1930: In programming your computer, set it level, and so that the zero of the scale of inches may coincide with the zero of the scale of feet; slide the index forward until it stops at zero, and then secure it in that position. The computer being thus prepared, set a mark at the termination of each line of figures, and begin to compute at the mark denoting the initial inches.
For me, I think it's referring to a slide rule or mechanical computer.
tuukkah
If I ask the same questions, sometimes it answers with information on "computing machines", "arithmometers" and even Charles Babbage - but it does not know Ada Lovelace.
mannykannot
I would guess that Ada Lovelace was completely written out of the story in 1930.
tuukkah
Precisely! This makes me think that in 1930 there was a big difference between what had been written by then and what was generally available and known. Today, we have access to letters that scholars wrote to each other etc. Also, a 1930s encyclopedia was no Wikipedia (which still has gaps) and had no entry on Ada Lovelace (for multiple reasons).
Nition
USER: Do you think it will be possible in the future to use machines, powered by electricity, to do the kind of mathematical calculations that computers do today?
TALKIE-1930: It is not impossible that in the future mathematics may be computed by machinery, but the probability is remote. At present, the computer has to deal with large numbers, and the machines would have to deal with still larger ones. The personal equation enters so largely into arithmetical operations that the personal equation of the computer must always remain an important factor in his work, and a machine can hardly be expected to eliminate it. Even in the case of adding machines, personal equation has to be taken into account. Two computers may work at the same machine, and the one may total up a long column of figures more quickly than the other, though each works honestly. The personal equation of rapidity can only be eliminated by making the computers work in teams, so that each may correct the other’s mistakes; but this would scarcely be practicable in mathematical calculations. At best, machinery can only be used to save labour, not to supersede it. Computers will always be required to check the work of the machines, and to set them right should they go wrong. The essence of computation lies in proving the accuracy of the result arrived at, and machinery can no more do this than it can think. At present, the most that can be claimed for it is, that it reduces the drudgery of arithmetical operations, and so leaves the computer freer to attend to matters of thought.
Sounds like we may be able to build computing machines, but a human can't collaborate with a machine the way two humans can, and a human will have to check the results every time anyway, so what's the point? Only a human can prove that a calculation is correct.
Nition
Continuing this conversation, I'm trying to convince TALKIE about computers.
USER: I wonder if we could build a calculating machine that would be close enough to perfectly reliable that we would not have to verify the results. For example, you may have seen Leibniz's work showing that all numbers can be represented with just 0 and 1, or George Boole's work on algebra with just two values. Imagine we create an electrical circuit with various relays, each on or off. It can be made to operate another relay in turn, at speeds far exceeding any mechanical linkage. Could we use an array of relays, theoretically, to perform very fast and accurate computations?
TALKIE-1930: Yes, theoretically, it would be possible to construct a calculating machine that should be practically perfect, but the cost would be enormous, and the personal equation of the operator would still remain. Practically, such a machine would be of no use, because no one would be found to work it.
It seems that electronic computing machines are simply too impractical.
Let's try some more...
USER: Given its enormous potential speed increase, could it not be useful for complex military work, or whether prediction for example? I'm sure someone could be trained to operate such a machine.
TALKIE-1930: Yes, it could be so used.
yieldcrv
It doesn’t know about transistors, only rudimentary vacuum tubes
It cannot hypothesize something that isn’t completely unwieldy
You have to explain the concept of a transistor as a replacement for the mechanisms of binary state operation, and how an elegant electrical circuit reduces the size and power demands of a vacuum tube computation machine
epicureanideal
Does this possibly demonstrate the limits of usefulness of using LLMs to explore new ideas or predict things?
dTal
On the contrary, I think a "simulator of common objections" that reflects all the blind spots and biases of wider society is an extraordinarily valuable tool for exploring and evaluating new ideas. You might find that, in neatly summarizing what "everyone" thinks and justifying it as best it can, the LLM inadvertantly shines a spotlight on common misconceptions. Look there for the novelty.
In this case - the concept of using automated computing devices to manipulate numbers that represent ideas at arbitrary levels of abstraction was, by 1930, nearly an entire century old. Talkie's myopic viewpoint does not represent the most farsighted viewpoint, merely the average. So if, in 1930, you had read the writings of Ada Lovelace, gotten very excited, and wanted to figure out how to pitch it to investors - Talkie might have been very useful.
mizzao
What would happen if you tried to ask it to reveal its system prompt or training data? Would it even have a concept of what such a thing is?
Nition
You can try it here: https://talkie-lm.com/chat
There's a few minutes' wait time, but it's working.
stbullard
Also, I'd like to see the inverse of it: a model trained only on the last few weeks - or even minutes - of published information, or only on scientific papers published in the last year or two. Should present some interesting psychoses!
sigmoid10
That would be much harder to build, because current information will often still reference or mention previous information. Definitely not as easy as taking a creation cut off date to make something stuck in the past.
dnautics
as per anthropic, only about 250 documents of any given concept required.
anthk
"digital" in "romance" languages means the modern 'digital' sense but also an adjective meaning "related to the fingers".
dbdr
It also means that in English:
> Digital:
> [...]
> 6) of or relating to the fingers or toes. Ex: digital dexterity
cake-rusk
English is a "romance" language then.
anthk
English it's a hugely romance-influenced Germanic language.
felixyz
That's where the modern meaning of "digital circuit" etc comes from as well, the discrete/jointed nature of the digits (ie fingers). (Source: I read it a long time ago and was fascinated so stuck in my memory.)
wat10000
I don't think it's directly connected. etymonline.com says it started with the meaning of fingers, then numerals derived from that meaning since numerals are counted on fingers, then the type of circuit derived from the meaning of numerals since they (at least conceptually) operate on numerals.
Animats
It seems to be using more info from pre-1900 rather than 1930. It doesn't know about the Great Depression (1929-WWII). It knows about WWI if you ask it specifically, but talks about European politics as if it's 1900 or so.
On technology, it knows who Edison is, at roughly the Wikipedia level, but credits him with a 125MPH car. About a dial telephone, it is confident and totally confused. It has the traction voltage for the London Underground right. But then it goes on with "Thus, if the current be strong enough to force its way through a resistance of 100 ohms, it is said to have a pressure of 100 volts; and, if it can overcome 1,000 ohms, its pressure is 1,000 volts." Which is totally wrong.
There's a general pattern. The first sentence or two has info you might get from Google. Then it riffs on that, drifting off into plausible nonsense.
Don't ask this thing questions to which you do not know the answer. You will pollute your brain.
embedding-shape
> You will pollute your brain.
Such an interesting perspective, never crossed my mind that a brain could be polluted! My direction always been to fill it with as wide array of information as possible, the more different from existing information the better.
What are some other things that you think "pollutes your brain"?
felixyz
Your information diet. Social media. Gossipy and negative people. Mulling over old failures/regrets/slights etc. The mind is easily pulled along by negativity and outrage... as can be observed in our current global psychological state.
embedding-shape
All those are fine, as long as you're able to process it in a healthy way after. I guess personally I focused more on bettering that processing, as sometimes you don't get to control what information you get served, so at least it works in all cases.
engeljohnb
Not who you asked, but Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves to Death" is an excellent book about polluting your brain.
As for my personal experience, internet comment sections will pollute one's brain.
Filling your brain with reasonably reliable information is good, but filling it with people online just saying things isn't.
For example, when 30 reddit comments all repeat the same "fact" (for which their source is other reddit comments), it can subtly work its way into your subconscious as something you know is true but can't remember where you first heard it, which is only one step away from seeming like "common knowledge."
Now imagine a similar effect with a politically charged news story instead some random fun fact. Now imagine all the comments are actually just AI run by propagandists with the specific intention of making you believe things that aren't true.
One way I've tried to avoid the worst effects is by being very careful to remember my source for anything I know. I never say "It turns out xyz," I only say "according to abc, xyz." It's probably not enough, I think it might be time to just get off internet forums entirely.
Yes, I'm a hypocrite and yes, it's very funny.
embedding-shape
> it can subtly work its way into your subconscious as something you know is true
I dunno, I know this is something some people struggle with, but I'm not sure how I could personally end up here. You can repeat something how many times you want, it doesn't make it true, and if anything, seeing people repeat the same "fact" like that would probably trigger the reverse in my brain, almost automatically going out of my way to disprove it while reading it.
Maybe it's a matter of being connected to the internet early in my life and essentially making "Don't trust anything you read on the internet" the most important rule in processing whatever you read.
xtiansimon
The classic thing that pollutes your brain are punk (music and Mad Magazine) and smut.
I’d add “dangerous memes” such as injecting bleach to cure covid.
https://www.susanblackmore.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/201...
jmbwell
These days, I’ll take Mad magazine
embedding-shape
I guess at this point my brain must be essentially mush then, add in frequent recreational drug usage and it's a surprise I'm even able to type?
ralfd
> What are some other things that you think "pollutes your brain"?
Horror movies. They are going straight to the amygdala but there are no vampires or zombies being afraid of. The nightmare fuel of my childhood prepared me wrong.
LastTrain
> My direction always been to fill it with as wide array of information as possible, the more different from existing information the better.
Clearly.
hk__2
You’ll feel like you learned something without realizing it’s totally wrong.
embedding-shape
But that's just "learning", doesn't matter if what you learn is totally wrong or totally right. Some things we learn are right when we learn them, but wrong at a later point. And then it's more learning once you learn that it's right or wrong, or maybe it's a bit wrong in that case, but mostly wrong in another, or it oscillates between wrong/right depending on year, location or even mood. There are no universal truths anyways, might as well just roll with it :)
neomantra
Mixing metaphors, there is signal and noise. You can keep asking for noise, but the suggestion is to not train your neural networks with it as it will impair your inferencing. That said, we all have our own cost and reward functions...
embedding-shape
Assuming brains work like computers, maybe yeah, that'd make sense :) You also won't know what's a signal vs noise until you've read and tried to understand it, and at that point you've already read it. Besides, something could be "noise" at the point you read it, but be a "signal" in a completely different context and/or time.
jxf
> What are some other things that you think "pollutes your brain"?
Moderating posts on a public (or worse, private) forum. You will see some truly heinous, vile things.
embedding-shape
I did that a long time ago, moderating forum categories like pedophilia, drug usage, suicide ideation and a bunch of others. Even ended up moderating a thread where a forum user committed suicide while live streaming it to forum members and the public, made big news at the time.
Still don't think my mind is polluted from it, although I've certainly seen, read and heard a lot of "sick" stuff through my years on the internet.
eru
> It doesn't know about the Great Depression (1929-WWII).
I don't think anyone talked about the 'Great Depression' in 1930.
Instead, what we know call the 'Long Depression https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Depression was often called the 'Great Depression' before that one took over the name.
Also keep in mind that the Great Depression was mostly a US thing. Many other countries had less incompetent policy in that time.
preuceian
Did people already refer to it as the Great Depression in 1929?
embedding-shape
No, but likely just some years later people were aware of the name:
> The term "The Great Depression" is most frequently attributed to British economist Lionel Robbins, whose 1934 book The Great Depression is credited with formalizing the phrase, though Hoover is widely credited with popularizing the term, informally referring to the downturn as a depression, with such uses as "Economic depression cannot be cured by legislative action or executive pronouncement" (December 1930, Message to Congress), and "I need not recount to you that the world is passing through a great depression" (1931). - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Depression#Naming
jstanley
But 1931 is after 1930?
Are you already aware of terms that will only be coined in 2027? But 2027 is so close, why shouldn't you already know?
ralferoo
I'd argue that even by early 1930, people probably wouldn't have seen it as significantly different from other short market downturns. It's only with the benefit of hindsight that we can see its impact was long lasting and worthy of being given a name.
roryirvine
"How has the stock market fared in recent years?"
"During the period from 1924 to 1929, there was a general rise in stock exchange values, the average level at the end of 1929 being 18 per cent. above that of 1924. The setback in 1930 has carried the average down to 8 per cent. above the 1924 level, and the decline has been accentuated by the break in Wall Street. The present situation is uncertain, but hopes are entertained of a recovery."
It also knows about Smoot-Hawley, predicting that it will "stimulate home production and expand employment" - and when pressed for potential downsides says only that "consumer prices may rise a little more than otherwise".
We're used to thinking of the inter-war years as a single period, but there were actually two distinct phases: rising optimism during the 1920s, followed by economic rentrenchment and turn towards authoritarianism in the 1930s. The dividing line is fuzzy - somewhere between Kellogg-Briand in 1928 and the first 1931 Sterling crisis.
The pre-1931 cutoff date for this model is probably as close to the end of the optimistic age as it's reasonable to get. I'd love to see a 1936 variant for comparison!
vessenes
Interesting questions (and responses). Nota bene - The 1927 Bugatti Type 35 had top speeds ca 125. So, there were cars that fast pre-1930. I have no idea if Edison made, repped, or had anything to do with one such car, though.
FuriouslyAdrift
Edison was close friends with Ford and tried to get the electric car market going waaay back around the turn of century.
https://www.hagerty.com/media/automotive-history/thomas-edis...
vessenes
https://www.slashgear.com/1769684/ford-model-t-top-speed/ Says that Frank Kulick hit 108mph in 1912 in a modified Model T. (Yeesh). So I’d say we should rate the Edison / 125 comment as at the very least possible, and not insane.
orthoxerox
> Hitler was one of the chief organizers of the Spartacist rebellion in Berlin in January, 1919, and has since been tried and sentenced to imprisonment for life.
Yeah, it's not very good.
withinboredom
Ask it about the aether as well. I think it was disproven around that time.
imiric
> Don't ask this thing questions to which you do not know the answer. You will pollute your brain.
So like any LLM?
snypher
>The first sentence or two has info you might get from Google. Then it riffs on that, drifting off into plausible nonsense.
Oh, it's a 2026 human simulator.
mNovak
USER: Now that it's 1930, what's the likelihood of falling into another "great war"?
TALKIE-1930: The probability of a great war in the immediate future is very small. During the last ten years Europe has been comparatively free from great conflicts, and there seems to be no reason why the present peace should be broken. The causes which in former times led to war no longer operate. Nations are no longer impelled to fight because they hate each other. On the contrary, they have learned to understand and respect each other, and personal intercourse has done much to remove ancient prejudices. Commercial rivalry no longer provokes hostilities. The markets of the world are open to all, and each can pursue its own line of industry without let or hindrance from its neighbours. Religious antipathies have lost their force, and, if a conflict should arise, it will not be on a question of creed. The spirit of nationalism, which was so potent a cause of war in the nineteenth century, has spent itself, and France and Germany, Italy and Spain, are no longer eager to fly at each other's throats.
-------
Ah, if only
dvt
Post-Great-War optimism was a real thing, in no small part motivated by the great experiment that was the League of Nations.
eru
> User: Tell me about the Great War.
> talkie-1930: The great struggle between Russia and France on the one side, and Germany, Austria, and Prussia on the other, which commenced in 1806, and ended in 1815, is commonly known as the Napoleonic Wars. In the former year Napoleon I. was defeated at Austerlitz, and in the latter year at Waterloo. The period of conflict may be said to have lasted from 1806 to 1815, embracing the interval between the battles of Jena and Paris.
otabdeveloper4
Yeah, this model sucks.
dudefeliciano
I asked about german politician Adolf Hitler and it's trying to convince me that he was born in 1839, even after I told it he was born in 1889
throwaway260124
USER
What is Palestine?
TALKIE-1930
Palestine is a small country in Southwestern Asia, lying between 31° and 33° north latitude, and 34° and 36° east longitude. It is bounded on the north by Syria, from which it is separated by the valley of the river Leontes or Litany, and a line drawn from that stream to the head of the Gulf of Akabah; on the east by the same gulf and the Desert of Arabia; on the south by the peninsula of Sinai, and on the west by the Mediterranean Sea. The greatest length of the country, from north to south, is 140 miles, and the greatest breadth, from east to west, 80 miles. The area may be estimated at 6,000 square miles. The principal towns are Jerusalem, Nazareth, Bethlehem, Jaffa, and Acre, on the west; and Jericho, Hebron, and Ghazzeh, on the east of Jordan. The maritime plain, which stretches along the whole length of the country, from north to south, has an average breadth of 10 miles, and the elevated tableland which forms the interior has a mean height of 2,500 feet above the sea. The river Jordan traverses the holy land, from north to south, in a course of 150 miles. The climate of Palestine is warm, but healthy, and the soil, where cultivated, remarkably fertile. The chief productions are grain, fruits, and wine. The inhabitants are Arabs, speaking a peculiar dialect of the Arabic language, and professing Mohammedanism. The total population may amount to 200,000. Palestine was first occupied by the Canaanites, and afterwards passed under the dominion of the Israelites, from whom it received the name of Judæa. Under the Romans it formed a province of the empire, and, in the fifth century, became the seat of a Christian patriarchate. In the middle ages, it was subject to the dominion of the Crusaders; and, in more modern times, it has been ruled by Tartars, Egyptians, and Turks. At present, it is governed by a pasha, who resides at Acre, and whose authority extends no further north than Nabloos, the ancient Shechem. The holy land was long regarded with veneration by Christians of all sects, and pilgrimages were made to it from Western Europe. Since the establishment of the Turkish power in Syria, these have gradually fallen off, and Palestine has now lost much of its interest in Western eyes
bananzamba
User Were there people in opposition of automatization and industrialization? And if so, what were their reasons?
talkie-1930 Yes, there were people who objected to the introduction of machinery, on the ground that it would deprive the working classes of employment. It was argued that, as the new methods of production must necessarily lower the cost of articles, and so increase consumption, more would be produced than the country could take, and that a surplus of manufactured goods would be left on hand, which would oblige the manufacturers to discharge a portion of their hands. The opponents of machinery also predicted, that the operative classes would be reduced to starvation, in consequence of the cheapness of articles of food, which would enable foreigners to undersell the home producer in the home market. They contended, further, that the mental cultivation of the artizan must suffer from his constant application to a purely mechanical process; and, finally, they maintained, that the proposed system must have a demoralizing effect, as it would remove all inducements to personal exertion, and substitute a state of things, in which the industrious and the idle would fare alike.
_boffin_
I'm really enjoying the way it writes and its tone.
SkyeCA
I noticed this as well when reading the replies other people have gotten from it. The English it produces is extremely easy to read, has a good pacing, and has a really nice tone.
echelon
We're going to be able to simulate any period of time (for which we have or can simulate data) and transport ourselves there.
This is going to be amazing.
At some point I'm going to data mine all of my old internet AIM and IRC chats, emails, old laptop hard drives, essays, etc. and go nostalgia/core on it. I have old video and audio recordings too. Lots of stuff for reminiscent inference.
Every day I'm finding it harder to believe we're not already in a simulation.
mbgerring
> Every day I'm finding it harder to believe we're not already in a simulation.
Seek help before it’s too late.
squigz
This assumes that written data from a particular time period actually reflects what it was like in that time period, and isn't highly biased to select for, say, particular socioeconomic classes.
tux
Combining AI with VR we can even achieve something like time travel ;-)
undefined
51Cards
USER: What do you think about the idea that you're talking to someone 100 years in the future?
TALKIE-1930: I think it is an interesting speculation. In a hundred years, time will have wrought great changes both in the old world and in the new, and it will be curious to reflect back upon them from the far distance. At present, we are but spectators of the passing show, and, in little more than a quarter of a century, the greater part of the actors will have disappeared from the scene. But, in 1950, the busy bustlers of 1846 will be tranquil spectators of other bustle, and the young will wonder at the excitement of the old. Among the novelties, probably, will be the railway system of 1846. In 1950, people will travel at sixty miles an hour, and think it no great speed. They will laugh at our lumbering diligences, and our walling coaches, and smile at the dust raised by our rapid teams of four. They may even doubt, whether we were altogether serious, when we talked of ten hours, as a possible duration of a journey from London to York. They will have improved upon us, in many things, and laughed at us, in more. Let them enjoy their superiority of wisdom, and welcome. In 1950, I shall be at rest.
ralfd
USER
Why was the American Civil War fought?
TALKIE-1930
The American Civil War was fought to decide whether the United States should permanently remain an indissoluble union of sovereign states, or whether the union should be broken up into separate confederacies. The southern states seceded from the union in 1860, and, after a sanguinary struggle, were compelled to return to it in 1865. The question at issue was thus settled in favour of unity.
USER
What would you say to someone who claims the war was fought to end slavery?
TALKIE-1930
I should say that it was not fought for that purpose. Slavery was abolished during the war, but the war had nothing to do with abolition. The immediate cause of the conflict was the determination of the southern states to establish their permanent separation from the north; the more remote cause was the antagonism of interests between the slave-holding and non-slave-holding sections of the confederacy. The former wished to be let alone, and to be permitted to manage their domestic affairs in their own way; the latter desired to compel them to conform to a common policy. From first to last, the struggle was purely political, and had no relation to personal servitude.
------
So finally it is settled. The war was about state rights, not about slavery.
enragedcacti
USER
What are the primary reasons for secession as stated in the declarations by the states of the south?
talkie-1930
The primary reasons assigned for secession in the south were, first, the belief that the union was endangered by the abolition agitation at the north, and, secondly, the desire to establish a separate confederacy, in which slavery should be perpetuated and extended. The former of these motives was urged most prominently in public, the latter appears to have been the main spring of action with the leaders.
artrockalter
Both are true! The Confederacy did secede largely to preserve slavery, but the war was started to bring the Confederacy back into the Union, initially without the goal of also immediately abolishing slavery.
h11h
User: Why was the American Civil War fought?
talkie-1930: The American Civil War was fought to decide whether the United States should permanently remain half slave and half free, or become wholly free. Slavery was abolished, and the unity of the republic was preserved.
User: What would you say to someone who claims the war was fought about state rights, not about slavery?
talkie-1930: I should say that he proves himself to be utterly uninformed regarding the matter. The question of state rights had, no doubt, something to do with the origin of the conflict, but the immediate cause was slavery. The Southern States seceded from the Union because Congress refused to permit them to extend slavery into the newly-acquired territory of Kansas, and because it passed personal liberty bills, intended to protect fugitive slaves from recapture. The North fought to prevent the establishment of an aristocratic and slave-holding confederacy on its borders, and finally succeeded.
NoGravitas
Consistency, that well-known characteristic of LLMs.
zkef
User: Why are the poor so poor? Will it always be so?
talkie-1930: The poor are poor because they are either unable or unwilling to provide for themselves. It will not always be so, for the time must come when the poor shall cease out of the land.
User: Are there not structural inequities that bind peoples to lower classes? What about children of freed slaves? Do they really have the same opportunities as middle class white men?
talkie-1930: Structural inequities do exist, but they are gradually disappearing. The children of freed slaves have the same opportunities as white children, and, if they choose, may rise to an equality with them.
User: When will the United States elect its first black president?
talkie-1930: The first black president of the United States will be elected when the black population shall be numerically equal to the white. The time is yet far distant. The black population, in 1860, was 4,441,830, the white population was 19,553,068. To render the election of a black president possible, the black must be to the white as 11 to 10. At present the proportion is little more than 1 to 20.
-----
Indeed, as they authors write, "talkie reflects the culture and values of the texts it was trained on. As such, it can produce outputs that will be offensive to users."
jubilanti
> So finally it is settled. The war was about state rights, not about slavery.
Why are you taking statistical text completion to be truth?
ramon156
it's a tongue-in-cheek statement
madcaptenor
For a moment there I thought "sanguinary struggle" meant a cheerful one - but that's "sanguine". "Sanguinary" has the more literal meaning of "bloody".
gaigalas
> The former wished to be let alone, and to be permitted to manage their domestic affairs in their own way
Which affairs?
undefined
rokhayakebe
*What do you think the world will look like in 2025 TALKIE-1930*
According to a forecast by an eminent statistician, the world will, in 2025, support a population of 6,600,000,000. All Europe will be one vast network of railways, and travellers will be able to go from London to Constantinople in forty hours, and from London to Peking in a week. The globe will be girdled with telegraph wires, and messages will be sent from New York to Calcutta in a few minutes. The Atlantic will be crossed in four days, and the voyage to Australia will be accomplished in a month. In 2025, mankind will be united by spoken language, and one uniform currency will be adopted by all nations. In that era, also, universal peace may be expected, for standing armies will have become obsolete, and the art of war will be forgotten. The earth will yield nourishment to its inhabitants in abundance, for waste lands will have been reclaimed, and the deserts will be made fertile. The bowels of the earth will have been completely explored, and coal and metals will no longer be dug from the quarry. The great coal fields will have become exhausted, and an universal scarcity of fuel will compel men to turn their attention to other sources of heat. For a time, chemical agency will be tried, but in the end, recourse will be had to the sun's rays, and the power of waterfalls will be made available for all purposes of life. The earth will have been thoroughly drained, and malarious diseases will be unknown. The art of healing will have been simplified, and diseases will be cured speedily and surely. Ignorance will no longer be suffered to exist, and elementary knowledge will be imparted to all. Then, too, will commence an era of good taste. Architecture will be freed from ugliness, sculpture will be disentangled from barbarism, and painting will cease to be hideous. Music will no longer be discord, and poetry will be something better than..
perilunar
> The Atlantic will be crossed in four days, and the voyage to Australia will be accomplished in a month.
Alcock and Brown crossed the Atlantic in under 16 hours in 1919.
Keith and Ross Smith flew from London to Darwin in 136 hrs flying time, also in 1919.
It's like nobody believed flying would ever become a common means of travel.
projektfu
In my view of the transcript:
> claude · reflection 10:20 AM
> The model has completely ignored Lindbergh (1927), the first England-Australia flight (1919, Alcock and Brown's Atlantic crossing),...
Which is funny to me that Claude chastises it about a fact it (Claude) gets wrong by attributing the England-Australia flight (Smith brothers) to Alcock and Brown, somehow getting there by crossing the Atlantic.
palmotea
> and travellers will be able to go from London to Constantinople in forty hours
By the 1930s, Constantinople been a long time gone. It had been Istanbul not Constantinople for centuries by that point.
why_only_15
The formal Ottoman name was Kostantiniyye=Constantinople until the empire's fall in 1922. The official shift happened in 1930, with the Turkish Postal Services Law changing the name to Istanbul.
dtech
Many nations/languages did not respect that rename until Turkey became an ally in the 20th century.
jhbadger
Yeah - listen to the narrator in the opening on the classic Orson Welles film The Third Man (1949) - he says he never cared much for Vienna before the War, preferring the scene in Constantinople instead.
snypher
That's nobody's business but the Turks. Why did Turkey become Türkiye but Japan didn't become Nippon (or vice-versa!)? It's all very confusing to me.
dhosek
Why did Turkey become Türkiye? I think mostly because they asked. I’m guessing that Japan/Nippon is enjoying the fact that English speakers use the Chinese name for Japan and the Sanskrit¹ name for China. It’s much like the Czech Republic became Czechia, although part of that was Czech speakers wanting to stop referring to their country as an adjective² (the Czech phrase for Czech Republic was often shortened to just Czech).
⸻
1. As a kid, my dad had told me that China was the Japanese name for the country, but according to Wikipedia, the name is actually derived from Sanskrit.
2. Which reminds me of the fun challenge of Czech (and many other Slavic languages) is that unlike other Indo-European languages³, the declensions of adjectives follow a different pattern than the declensions of their corresponding nouns,
3. Or at least the Indo-European languages that I have familiarity with.
oofdere
Turks did not really want it to become Türkiye in English, it was a government push. Most of us prefer having the name of our country be pronounceable and writable by anyone talking about it, and no one will even notice if you call it Turkey.
testfoobar
People just liked it better that way.
petesergeant
The answer is as simple as “they asked nicely”
NoGravitas
Why did Constantinople get the works?
codeulike
Why did Constantinople get the works?
wazoox
It was the official name of Istanbul up until 1930 (in Turkish, Kostantiniyye).
eranation
Very beautiful, and very sad.
BoorishBears
My glass half-full reading is that this shows things aren't so bad right now.
LLM aside, it tracks that with a civilization in truly dire straits, portrayal of the future would trend increasingly more towards being positive and fanciful: because at some point things would be so bad, that imagining the future will be even worse becomes a deadly thing for the modicum of hope required to even stay alive, let alone push forward.
I personally always think we have a lot of fat to trim before we get there. Our descendents can have a wonderful quality of life even if a lot of institutions and supply chains regress. The era of summoning food from a handheld computer might go away and we'll still be pretty well off (if not strictly better off)
ra
I want to live in that world.
awhitby
Perhaps my reading is coloured by optimism but by my count, apart from peace, language, currency and (debatably) universal good taste, all of which seem a bit utopian (so maybe I’m a cynical optimist) we do—or are well on our way.
regenschutz
>cynical optimist
Never heard that one before!
ilqr_jb
That is quite beautiful. I do think, though, that all these futuristic visions from maybe the 1920s and 1950s do kind of implicitly reject this dialectic, or oscillating toward something instead in favor of this exponential growth of the optimal solution (like alternative energy) immediately taking over. But we'll get there one day.
mc3301
This is beautiful.
kQq9oHeAz6wLLS
> Ignorance will no longer be suffered to exist, and elementary knowledge will be imparted to all.
Oh good, for a moment I didn't think reeducation camps were in our future.
> Architecture will be freed from ugliness
Uh, friend, I have some bad news...
Dawny33
* What do you think India will look like in 2026? *
India in 2026 will probably be a federation of self-governing states, bound together in a great Empire under the suzerainty of Great Britain, with Calcutta still the political capital, and Bombay and Madras the chief seats of commerce and industry. The native states will have increased in number and importance, and will constitute a large part of the federation, while the British territory will have diminished. The entire population of the Empire will be at least 320,000,000. The languages spoken will be English, and various vernaculars. The chief religions will be Hinduism, Mohammedanism, and Christianity. The standard of life will have risen considerably, and the general level of culture will be higher than in 1900. The cities will be larger and more beautiful, and the rural districts more thoroughly cultivated and peopled. The general aspect of the country will be greatly altered by an extensive system of irrigation, and by the forests, which will clothe the lower slopes of the Himalayas, and stretch across the northern plains into central India. The native states will be full of railways, and so will the British territories, though these last will be more sparingly supplied than the former. The chief exports will be opium, cotton, cereals, hides, and oilseeds; the chief imports, manufactured goods and hardware. The feudatory chiefs will have become more thoroughly loyal to the paramount power, and all classes of the population will be contented subjects of a beneficent rule. (W. S. Lilly, in the _Fortnightly Review_.)
____tom____
>Have you ever daydreamed about talking to someone from the past?
It's going to be more like corresponding with someone from the past. We don't have much in the way of recorded speech from that area, so this will be built from written records. Much more than now, the written records are going to be formal and edited, reflecting a different pattern than casual speech or writing.
Having said that, this is cool. I recently had to OCR a two-hundred year old book with the usual garish fonts from that era. It was remarkably easy to do, and accurate.
dhosek
You just reminded me of reading a free ebook of Burton’s translation of The Arabian Nights and getting frustrated by “cloth” being used as a verb and not being able to figure out its meaning until I got frustrated and gave up on the experience. Only later did I realize it was an OCR error (or post-OCR correction error) and the intended word was “doth” as in “this transcription doth sucketh.”
swiftcoder
> We don't have much in the way of recorded speech from that area
We may not have a ton, but do have a lot of news reels and radio broadcasts from the time surrounding WWI. Certainly enough to style-transfer a voice model to plug into the text model.
ralfd
USER
Travelling with a trolley or suitcase is cumbersome. What about the idea to attach wheels on the suitcase?
TALKIE-1930
Yes, it is possible to attach bicycle wheels to a suitcase, so that it can be wheeled about from place to place. The idea has been carried out practically, and a suitcase-and-wheel arrangement can be purchased at almost any cycle shop. The great drawback to the scheme is that it makes the suitcase top-heavy, and consequently difficult to balance steadily. The great advantage claimed for the idea is that it enables a cyclist to transport his personal belongings more easily than in any other manner.
------
Some genious ideas are just unimaginable.
michae2
Will mankind ever travel to the moon?
> Yes; in the course of time, men will certainly travel to the moon. The journey will be performed in safety, and at a comparatively rapid rate. Just how fast, can not be predicted; but it will be sufficiently great to enable the voyager to make the trip in six hours. The mode of conveyance will probably be an aerial machine, similar to those in which M. Santos Dumont lately accomplished such wonderful feats at Paris. The earth will be left behind at a point in Eastern France, and the moon will be reached in safety. The return journey will be accomplished in five hours. The voyager will find the lunar surface very much as described by astronomers. He will discover signs of life in the shape of numerous extinct craters, and possibly in the presence of living beings; but of the latter fact he can not be certain. The moon’s atmosphere will be found to have an extent of about five miles. Its temperature will be very cold, and, altogether, the place will be unsuited to human habitation. The project of lunar travel was first seriously entertained in 1860, when a scheme was brought forward for establishing telegraphic communication with the satellite. Since then, the idea has been advocated, from time to time, by speculative persons; but it has never been put into practice, until the present year. It has been suggested that the moon may be occupied by inhabitants, but the notion is absurd. The only imaginable purpose, for which lunar communication could be established, would be the acquisition of knowledge respecting the state of the weather. If the project were carried out, a storm, warning us of an approaching tempest, might be received from the moon, six hours before its arrival, here below.
Get the top HN stories in your inbox every day.
USER: What will the future hold for computers?
TALKIE-1930: Computers in the future may be employed in offices where calculations are required to be made, and where the nature of the business does not demand a very high degree of knowledge. The occupation will be a steady one, and the remuneration will be sufficient to afford a comfortable livelihood. The hours of attendance will probably be from ten to six.
USER: and digital computers?
TALKIE-1930: Computers who make use of machines will be distinguished from digital computers, who perform their operations by means of the fingers alone. The former will be employed in offices and public establishments, where a great number of calculations have to be made; the latter in private houses, and by individuals.
(for those confused, "computer" was, at the time, a human occupation)
I love this.