However, the author warns against viewing AI as a tool for automation or replacement of human tasks, emphasizing its potential for augmentation instead. The author encourages researchers to explore these tools and contribute to the public debate, to prevent misuse by unscrupulous actors. The author concludes by expressing optimism about the future of AI in historical research, provided it is used to augment research and creativity rather than replace human effort.
Key takeaways:
- OpenAI's GPT-4 can be customized for specific use cases, including aiding historical research by reading, organizing, and analyzing historical texts, images, and other media.
- The author argues that generative AI should be seen as a tool for augmenting, not automating, the work of historians and researchers. It can suggest new approaches to source analysis, help find connections, and potentially democratize the field by lowering the barrier to entry.
- Through various case studies, the author demonstrates how AI can analyze historical advertisements, generate data visualizations, transcribe and translate old texts, and even identify historical figures and objects. However, it also has limitations and can make errors.
- The author believes that the variety and accessibility of these augmented abilities can open up new possibilities for historical research. He encourages researchers to approach these tools as methods for augmenting research and creativity, rather than seeing them as threats to replace human work.