"AI And Napoleonics" Topic

A thread for some fun observations, on a topic I don't think I have seen covered here.

Has anyone else tried AI for their Naps research? I have used ChatGPT. One thing of notice was the "hallucination" of more obscure topics. I asked a few things that I knew the answer to, but various degrees of obscure.

First, a few months ago I asked for all the numbers of Austrian line regiments, and their facing colors. At first glance the response was amazing and in depth. It gave me all numbers, and grouped them by facing color. Great. What a resource.

But I looked closer and realized it was "fuzzy." Most of it was correct, but it was giving me information as well that was slightly off, but presented as fact. Specific examples are gone to time and lack of saved history, but I remember a couple of colors that do not exist, and a couple of colors that had blurred together that weren't actually similar.

I did some others, which were worse. Austrian Landwehr is one of my favorite topics and even for us here pretty obscure. It generally made stuff up.

Some it did fine, the less obscure items that are readily crawl-able off sites such as Wikepedia, like the OOB for Talavera.

What is most interesting is seeing the world go wild over AI, and this (let's just be honest) obscure topic we pour over is just obscure enough to see the wizard behind the curtain. It reminds me of Gell Mann amnesia.

link

"Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.

In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know." – Michael Crichton (1942-2008)

I thought worthy of sharing. Let me know your thoughts and experiences.

The worrying thing about today's AI is that certain people expect that it'll make beginners into super-stars; whereas, so far, it actually makes super-stars into super-super-stars, because the super-stars use the AI to increase their effectiveness and know enough to be able to filter out the hallucinations.

Of course, this may change with tomorrow's AI.

Waiting until "tomorrow" arrives is good enough for me!

Interesting topic. Working to improve our current rules for miniature gaming, I was intereted in a chat about whether artillery were predominantly used to shoot front line of the opposing army or wether it delberately targeted batalions behind the first lines. I had a good chat with chatgpt about it, but the issues when using it on a topic you are not and expert on, I can not be sure if the respond is based on genuine inforamtion avalibale to the AI or if it is a result of AI hallucination. You can see the thread by following this link, and possibly comment on how acurate you believe the response to be..
link

DevoutDavout
"I remember a couple of colors that do not exist,"
Then how do you remember them?

I remember a couple of colors that do not exist

Colours that DD knows about weren't presented by the AI.

@mg2:

What a load of waffle – and your question wasn't really answered – even when you prompted for more. Pretty typical AI output – starts off very promising and then starts to get into hand-wavey vaguelarities.

Stoppage,
Okay!

I use AI results to give an overall picture and a prompt to resources – it usually gives you the reference.

Interestingly, or maybe annoyingly when it comes to uniforms, the references come back to a TMP page. Often to my own post!

It selects for popularity, bolstered by the number of mentions. At the end of the day there's no peer-review of the facts. If you want accurate information click on the sources until they take you back to a BOOK! Even then, you have to actually read the book. Many references to Waterloo will take you back to Hoffshroer's books which are full of the dissembling and partisan references which I have previously shown on these boards to be made up.

Our God-given powers of logical thought demand we follow the Logos in our reasoning, which means of course, to find the truth:- go back to the beginning.

I think they are joking a bit, but I did indeed word it poorly.

A better way to phrase – I remember (in the AI output) a couple colors that do not exist (to Austrian facings).

Good point to circular back to TMP. In my experience can never go wrong with either "TMP X topic" or "X topic site:theminiaturespage" when I need an answer. AI is really just a google chatbot that forces an answer even when one doesn't exist. If I want something done right I do it myself.

Facings and uniform colours until the use of cameras was abstract. The less regular the unit the more the lines of fantasy, reality and error are blurred. Imagine your a guy drawing you quickly sketch the troops marching by or resting, then go home and draw the pretty uniform, now the colours over days change shade a little in your mind never mind the light you saw them in, the fact the facings after 2 months now where lighter due to wear and weather, so you call them lemon no yellow, and you drew a particular one or small croup but the rest of the unit could have worn a different or not uniform as what officially was worn sadly like all things is an aspiration. I own hundreds of uniform books and the print in some books is darker in others, some books have different sources so different info. Pick a source pick a book and paint

marmont1814
"Facings and uniform colours until the use of cameras was abstract. The less regular the unit the more the lines of fantasy, reality and error are blurred".

Cameras, lighting conditions, filters and lenses still distort. Nevertheless, "senses are windows on what is" – Antiphon. For uniforms, I prefer the written descriptions that emanate from the original orders, tempered by later observations about use and supply.

Still, "words are deceptive, conjuring up differences where there are none" – also Antiphon. Wonder if he was a wargamer.

The crux will be whether you tend to prefer the certainty of absolute definitions, ie the Parmenides and Platonic state of "being". Or whether you think with Heraclitus, that "you cannot step twice in the same river" and therefore view the world, or indeed an army, as a series of "becomings".

As the great Nosey said, "The fact is, a battle is like a ball; they keep footing it all the day through".

I am no stickler for shade of color, as long as similar and effort was made. Because not only can we not travel back in time, but none of their uniforms were dyed with modern industrialized methods and therefore little uniformity to an exact shade. Not to mention weathering and various colorfastness.

Often times as well, what is more important than any "true" color is conveying the character of a color and at different scales.

At 10mm the spirit of French blue is much different than reality, or at 28 or 40mm.

Another article that makes me … disturbed that computers exist.

I avoid AI like the plague. It's contributing to the 'dumbing down' of humanity (and we don't need any help!)

marmont1814
"Facings and uniform colours until the use of cameras was abstract"

Don't get this. Uniform colours start life as written orders. You don't need a camera to read.

At least, I don't.

Usually.

Colors conveyed with written word are inherently subjective, is his point.

DevoutDavout
"Colors conveyed with written word are inherently subjective, is his point"
Odd point. Hues vary within the range set by the written word, subject only to fading. That's pretty objective.

Vary is the key. Sit down 100 people with a text description and some paint. Youll end up with 100 slightly varying uniforms. Subjective.

DevoutDavout
"Subjective" means something based on personal feelings, tastes, or opinions.
Whereas orders are based upon fixed criteria.

You may as well say colonels interpret a commander's orders based upon subjective interpretation.

Correct.

Since there is variance without perfect precision, (ie, text description of a color, text description of an area, so on imperfect), there is some degree of subjective interpretation.