3 ms·

You can nowadays paste the text from pretty much anything that's in the public domain into a near-SOTA LLM such as Kimi or GLM and it will give you a pretty nic

You can nowadays paste the text from pretty much anything that's in the public domain into a near-SOTA LLM such as Kimi or GLM and it will give you a pretty nice summary of what it's about in modern language (Extremely useful: the LLM tendency to go overboard on formatting nicely balances out the wall-of-text format from historical publications, which was aimed at saving paper and minimizing manual layout effort), and then gladly tell you about all the things in the historical text that would be absolutely beyond the pale today. (Sometimes you have to nudge it by prompting "How would this text be received today?" or something like it after it has put its nice summary in context, but once you do that it tends to be quite thorough.)

quamserena 6mo ago
You can also read the text yourself and draw your own conclusions...
smallerize 6mo ago
You didn't really explain what that does for you. Why do you paste it into an LLM?
- zozbot234 6mo ago
  I'm not sure if you're familiar with public domain texts from around the 19th or early 20th century, but they were not intended to be skimmed or speed-read the way we'd skim a modern text prior to getting into a more attentive close-reading. Even their short magazine articles were actually the near-equivalent to our scholarly papers, and were often read aloud at length in parlor gatherings. So having a LLM split the text into manageable sections for you and provide a hint of what each lengthy wall-of-text paragraph will be about is actually a huge gain in readability.
  - smallerize 6mo ago
    Oh well that was the whole point to me. If I wanted to read something that's not from 1911 I could just do that lol
  - keane 6mo ago
    Mostly from a bit further back but you might enjoy https://earlymoderntexts.com/texts https://earlymoderntexts.com/texts
  - BigTTYGothGF 6mo ago
    The trick is to have a basic level of literacy and then you don't need the machine to chew it up for you like a mother bird.
  - qmr 6mo ago
    > So having a LLM split the text into manageable sections for you and provide a hint of what each lengthy wall-of-text paragraph will be about is actually a huge gain in readability. Perhaps your attention span needs improvement.
  - Dylan16807 6mo ago
    So before you were talking about summarizing whole articles and asking the LLM to find the things that would be "beyond the pale", but now you're just suggesting using it to insert paragraph breaks and section headings?
    - zozbot234 6mo ago
      The LLM will easily do both for you. Particularly the thinking it does when constructing the summary generally involves a structured close reading of your text, and you can easily think of it as providing "paragraph breaks and section headings".
      - smallerize 6mo ago
        I think the word "summarization" might be throwing people off. This is like an expansion.
      - Dylan16807 6mo ago
        Sure it could do both, but the question is what are you suggesting? If you're suggesting it alter the text beyond organizing it, people are going to be upset. And your first suggestion sounded like that.
doubletwoyou 6mo ago
I beg of thee, use that brain of yours and read a text that was made scarcely more than a century ago, a blink of an eye in the grand scale of the changes of the linguistic features of English, and interpret it for yourself.
- mapontosevenths 6mo ago
  I'm in favor of using all the tools available to better yourself, including LLM's. However, for things like this the I would argue that one should first try to understand it on their own. Sometimes the work is the POINT. We read things like this not just to learn about the past, but for novelty and to exercise our critical thinking powers. To outsource that labor before even trying is like going to the gym and having your butler lift the weights. The weights got lifted, but what was really accomplished?
  - zozbot234 6mo ago
    Historically, these texts were often consumed (especially in formal or semi-formal settings) by either having them read aloud for you or reading them aloud yourself. They were more like a written-down formal speech to be slowly pondered upon than something to be read smoothly and silently on one's own, which is how we now regard almost all texts. There was "labor" involved but that labor was not really about being more literate or exercising more critical thinking: it was simply about slowly recreating in one's mind the kind of broad structural scaffold we now expect to see in a text as a matter of course. It's in fact easier to think critically about a text when its sections and structure are clearly laid out, and having a LLM do this for you is a nice way of avoiding personal tendencies and biases that might lead one to misinterpret what the text is really about.
    - simonklitj 6mo ago
      Yes, let the LLM bias and misinterpret it instead.
    - mapontosevenths 6mo ago
      >Historically, these texts were often consumed (especially in formal or semi-formal settings) by either having them read aloud for you or reading them aloud yourself. In the middle ages this was true, mostly because few people were literate at all and the words didnt have spaces between them. The ability to read silently was regarded as impressive. By 1911 reading silently to yourself was the expectation of a normal literate adult. Only hillbillies and their ilk could not. This is a simple text, intended to be legible even to school children of the era. It's also very structured already. Their contemporary English was a bit different, but not so far removed that you should need assistance.
BigTTYGothGF 6mo ago
How is that not "modern language"?
stereolambda 6mo ago
Entertaining to think that "that's too difficult to read for us nowadays" and "look at these unacceptable things" already sound pretty much like some poor Medieval literates who got their hands on Ovid or Lucretius, while under the rule of king Theodoric or something. I don't have to say I don't question that we are very civilized and powerful.

quamserena 6mo ago

You can also read the text yourself and draw your own conclusions...

smallerize 6mo ago

You didn't really explain what that does for you. Why do you paste it into an LLM?

zozbot234 6mo ago
I'm not sure if you're familiar with public domain texts from around the 19th or early 20th century, but they were not intended to be skimmed or speed-read the way we'd skim a modern text prior to getting into a more attentive close-reading. Even their short magazine articles were actually the near-equivalent to our scholarly papers, and were often read aloud at length in parlor gatherings. So having a LLM split the text into manageable sections for you and provide a hint of what each lengthy wall-of-text paragraph will be about is actually a huge gain in readability.
- smallerize 6mo ago
  Oh well that was the whole point to me. If I wanted to read something that's not from 1911 I could just do that lol
- keane 6mo ago
  Mostly from a bit further back but you might enjoy https://earlymoderntexts.com/texts https://earlymoderntexts.com/texts
- BigTTYGothGF 6mo ago
  The trick is to have a basic level of literacy and then you don't need the machine to chew it up for you like a mother bird.
- qmr 6mo ago
  > So having a LLM split the text into manageable sections for you and provide a hint of what each lengthy wall-of-text paragraph will be about is actually a huge gain in readability. Perhaps your attention span needs improvement.
- Dylan16807 6mo ago
  So before you were talking about summarizing whole articles and asking the LLM to find the things that would be "beyond the pale", but now you're just suggesting using it to insert paragraph breaks and section headings?
  - zozbot234 6mo ago
    The LLM will easily do both for you. Particularly the thinking it does when constructing the summary generally involves a structured close reading of your text, and you can easily think of it as providing "paragraph breaks and section headings".
    - smallerize 6mo ago
      I think the word "summarization" might be throwing people off. This is like an expansion.
    - Dylan16807 6mo ago
      Sure it could do both, but the question is what are you suggesting? If you're suggesting it alter the text beyond organizing it, people are going to be upset. And your first suggestion sounded like that.

doubletwoyou 6mo ago

I beg of thee, use that brain of yours and read a text that was made scarcely more than a century ago, a blink of an eye in the grand scale of the changes of the linguistic features of English, and interpret it for yourself.

mapontosevenths 6mo ago
I'm in favor of using all the tools available to better yourself, including LLM's. However, for things like this the I would argue that one should first try to understand it on their own. Sometimes the work is the POINT. We read things like this not just to learn about the past, but for novelty and to exercise our critical thinking powers. To outsource that labor before even trying is like going to the gym and having your butler lift the weights. The weights got lifted, but what was really accomplished?
- zozbot234 6mo ago
  Historically, these texts were often consumed (especially in formal or semi-formal settings) by either having them read aloud for you or reading them aloud yourself. They were more like a written-down formal speech to be slowly pondered upon than something to be read smoothly and silently on one's own, which is how we now regard almost all texts. There was "labor" involved but that labor was not really about being more literate or exercising more critical thinking: it was simply about slowly recreating in one's mind the kind of broad structural scaffold we now expect to see in a text as a matter of course. It's in fact easier to think critically about a text when its sections and structure are clearly laid out, and having a LLM do this for you is a nice way of avoiding personal tendencies and biases that might lead one to misinterpret what the text is really about.
  - simonklitj 6mo ago
    Yes, let the LLM bias and misinterpret it instead.
  - mapontosevenths 6mo ago
    >Historically, these texts were often consumed (especially in formal or semi-formal settings) by either having them read aloud for you or reading them aloud yourself. In the middle ages this was true, mostly because few people were literate at all and the words didnt have spaces between them. The ability to read silently was regarded as impressive. By 1911 reading silently to yourself was the expectation of a normal literate adult. Only hillbillies and their ilk could not. This is a simple text, intended to be legible even to school children of the era. It's also very structured already. Their contemporary English was a bit different, but not so far removed that you should need assistance.

BigTTYGothGF 6mo ago

How is that not "modern language"?

stereolambda 6mo ago

Entertaining to think that "that's too difficult to read for us nowadays" and "look at these unacceptable things" already sound pretty much like some poor Medieval literates who got their hands on Ovid or Lucretius, while under the rule of king Theodoric or something. I don't have to say I don't question that we are very civilized and powerful.