As long as humanity is a thing, we will need historians. Your work is valuable and has helped me on my journey to understand myself through my ancestors. My 2nd great grandfather was possibly enslaved and could not sign his name; my great grandfather only completed the 4th grade; my grandmother graduated Highschool; my mother had some college; and I graduated college. Without your channel, I wouldn’t have been nudged to dig deep and find that story. Keep up the good work. For something to be of value, a group of humans has to value it. You value your work, and it shows. We value your work because it helps us. Your work provides substance to what it means to be an American. It combats the falsehood that we do not have a history. We do have a history, and we need to know it now more than ever. Well wishes, Danielle.
3 weeks ago (edited) | 20
I never trust what AI says, I also refuse to willingly or knowingly interact with it.
3 weeks ago (edited)
| 35
I'm a translator (I mainly do English subtitles for Japanese shows). Some agencies I work for have been adding AI "assistance" to their systems. The other day the AI translated "Thanks." "Yeah, thanks." (in casual Japanese) into "Screw you." "Yeah, it sucks." It also constantly gets pronouns wrong because, shockingly, not every language uses words for "he" and "she" the same way English does. My point is, people drastically overestimate how well AI can take actual translation jobs where accuracy matters.
3 weeks ago | 9
How are historians more replaceable than telemarketers 😢😢
3 weeks ago | 24
People have too much trust in AI. I'm not saying that cause it's gonna take over the world. I'm saying that because its not as good as people think it is.
3 weeks ago | 9
That is disturbing. AI will be rewriting the past and people will be clueless about what led us here.
3 weeks ago | 2
Considering we’ve all been yelling for a HUMAN, PLEASE to every automated system for however long now, I don’t think this will go well
3 weeks ago | 4
Historians' and analysts' jobs may be tougher to fully replace. In different ways, they rely on context to reach conclusions.
3 weeks ago | 7
Yea, but who wants to listen to a robot for history. That's the same reason why I failed math. No, you can't replace QUALITY. That one teacher who touched your life or made you enjoy learning something. And that's YOU dear! They can not replace that bella. Love your channel
3 weeks ago | 1
All those Sci-fi movies were right! From The Terminator to The Matrix, all predicted this.
3 weeks ago
| 10
You see I'd give it all the others, even web dev which I frustratingly JUST built a foundation for the last 4 years. But I call bull on Writers and Authoring. Sure on the technical side it may compose grammar and structures to an aproximate degree, weave and compile both fact and generative fiction, but writing is such a duplicitous subjective seemingly simple task where it CAN be that simple and yet the hardest thing to manifest from abstraction bc it attempts to capture the everchanging and incomprehensible heart that obeys no statistics, quantum mechanics, physics and is ever so elusive of this realm leaving both writer and reader only the promise to ponder. So I say confidently, no living soul will ever confidently seize this "faculty" because it is so much more, much less a silicone counterfit. Anymore than the camera, supposedly boasted about "capturing" the truth, before it became the biggest tool for deception and I'm not talking about edited images, deepfaking, etc. Cameras have for far longer have been used to exagurate, embellish, or diminish events via the simple angle of prespective. Medias caught taking a picture of a group of 20 people from up close marching and saying it's thousands. Abusive partners, choosing to footage the victim at the right moment of their reactions to their initial abuse thus distorting the context by cropping a select moment in the event. It hasn't lead us closer to the truth rather the opposite, refortified our deception. Bc we are the ever adapting concept of God that use tools, ALL tools, to serve our motivations. That is what makes us both wonderful and frightening, not these contraptions, bc we can and will eventually outgrow them. "The heart is deceitful above all things, And desperately wicked; Who can know it?" -Jer 17:9 "I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, And that my soul knows very well." -Psalm 139:14 p.s. I think your job is more important than ever
3 weeks ago (edited) | 6
Don't worry, you're a content creator anyway. Or more broadly "a communicator". What's interesting about the advent of AI is that in years past, all the predictions were that jobs hughly suceptible to automation (think receptionists) would go first. Turns out, it's the graphic designers and those of that ilk that are at greatest risk! But let's be honest here. If AI doesn’t wipe us out (an unsettlingly real possibility) it promises do do away with most jobs eventually. We will have to radically rethink what it is to "work". And who knows, once we are on that Universal Basic Income, we may all have more time for pursuits such as history 😂✌
3 weeks ago | 1
The list is propaganda. The general public these days take those types of things as gospel these days - no questioning and definitely no discussions because no one is meant to have an opinion anymore.
3 weeks ago | 5
I can see AI being of benefit. Let’s say my county has a stack of records, either typed or, if older, neatly handwritten. These could be property transfers or court cases. After scanning the documents into one or multiple PDFs, I could ask AI to index the contents for me. Yes, I could do this myself, but AI never gets bored, and can do it more quickly. Once the index is created, I can read through the index to see if, for example, an ancestor appeared in the trial transcripts as a juror, a witness, the plaintiff or the accused.
3 weeks ago | 0
For me, an AI historian could never replace the perspective and lived experienced that a person can offer. I would entertain both just for contrast's sake. And you could argue that the existence of AI will make human historians better because they'll have to deliver what a computer can't- which is a human meaning to the words. A machine- no matter how powerful- can never substitute for human connection. Could AI do better than a boring historian? maybe.. Could AI do better than a passionate historian? No.
3 weeks ago | 1
Writers and Authors on 4 gotta be the most hilarious and delusional thing to see there. How would you even train an AI if no one can make Training Material.
3 weeks ago | 0
NYTN
Top 40 "at risk" jobs that AI can easily "take over." Historian is #2. That is deeply disturbing.
3 weeks ago | [YT] | 282