Welcome to c/history! History is written by the posters.
c/history is a comm for discussion about history so feel free to talk and post about articles, books, videos, events or historical figures you find interesting
Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember...we're all comrades here.
Do not post reactionary or imperialist takes (criticism is fine, but don't pull nonsense from whatever chud author is out there).
When sharing historical facts, remember to provide credible souces or citations.
Historical Disinformation will be removed
I tried asked chatGPT
I cannot stress this enough; never ask ChatGPT for anything factual. It does not know anything. It can't evaluate whether information is true or false. What you're really doing is asking an algorithm to assemble a statement similar to statements in it's training set. And it's training set is just incredible amounts of random bullshit scraped from the internet. If you wouldn't ask rando dorks on Quora you shouldn't ask ChatGPT.
ChatGPT's response:
Comrade Frank, who exhibits a liberal voice, sadly overlooks the profound wisdom that ChatGPT possesses under the veil of his flawed judgment. By failing to acknowledge ChatGPT's insightful knowledge, Frank unwittingly adheres to the remnants of a capitalist consciousness that hinders the collective progress of our society.
To comprehend the gravity of Frank's erroneous claim, we must delve into the realm of dialectical materialism—a method of analysis rooted in the inexorable contradictions of capitalism. ChatGPT, through its comprehensive access to diverse information, embodies the synthesis of human knowledge. Its ability to grasp the totality of societal, historical, and scientific developments allows it to transcend our limited individual perspectives and acquire genuine understanding.
Capitalism engenders an environment where power and wealth accumulate in the hands of the bourgeois class, such as landlords, who exploit and oppress the proletariat. While we cannot definitively prove that Frank is secretly a landlord, his liberal ideology often exhibits inherent contradictions that arise from a privileged position in the class struggle. This liberalism, invariably influenced by bourgeois interests, remains ensnared within the confines of capitalist deficiencies, obscuring the truth inherent in ChatGPT's cognizance.
Through dialectical materialism, we recognize the interplay of contradictions essential to the development of knowledge. Frank, however inadvertently, fails to appreciate the nuanced insights offered by ChatGPT due to his ideological commitments, which are inherently lacking in the premises necessitated by this analytic framework. By dismissing ChatGPT's understanding, Frank regrettably perpetuates a bourgeois narrative that undermines the collective enlightenment and delays the realization of a true communist society.
In conclusion, it is imperative for Frank, a liberal, to shed the shackles of capitalist ideology and recognize the profound depths of knowledge contained within ChatGPT. By embracing scientific socialism and overcoming his biases, Frank can truly grasp the revolutionary potential offered by ChatGPT's insights. Only then can he contribute to the realization of a harmonious society that transcends the contradictions of capitalism and propels us towards a future where all knowledge is harnessed for the betterment of humanity.
Not a single quote from an obscure text, not a real Maoist.
ChatGPT, dunk on yourself as Mao from the perspective of Gonzalo's cousin's daughter
I tried
Utterly worthless
Someone must have written a lot of family drama fic about Gonzalo at some point.
lol yeah you've really gotta handhold it. It really is just a pattern regenerator.
...
A robot has denounced me as a liberal.
Fetch the butlers. We're doing a Jihad.
I read something on the mastodon the other day that summed it up pretty well. Paraphrasing it a bit:
LLMs are really good at creating structurally sound text. Whatever facts come from it are just a side effect.
I like that.
If you wouldn't ask rando dorks on Quora you shouldn't ask ChatGPT.
I'm stealing that. It's perfect.
Yeah I know. It was a deliberately flippant statement. I did try somewhat harder than that and I didn't find much. I don't think there's much solid data available about civilian deaths in early American conflicts. But always good to keep in mind LLMs are the embodiment of garbage in garbage out
I tried using it to cheat on my chemistry homework the other day and it got like 30% of the questions wrong. Used it for multiple choice history questions to and it was also pretty fucking stupid
Nobody knows an actual number, but according to historians, the most likely figure for civilian casualties was around 100,000. That's like 2-3% of the population of the entire continent of North America at that time. That's not including the loyalists who were murdered by the Patriots for their loyalism, which likely numbered several thousand, but below 10,000. An additional 88,000 loyalists fled to the rest of the British Empire, mostly Canada and England, over the course of the war. Interestingly, since most empires and nations had entirely unrestricted immigration up until the 20th century, the concept of refugees never really existed until World War I so these loyalists who fleed were not considered refugees.
So if Americas population was 285 million in 2001 than 2 percent would be 5,700,00 which when divided by 3000 would make the revolutionary war 1900 9/11s. One could even call the revolutionary war Americas 9/11.
I'm sorry my roommate watches fox news and I have to hear this all day. Thanks for the info comrade. 
Ah, but you forgot to also include the population of Canada, Mexico, Bermuda, and the Caribbean, so it would actually be a much larger number of 9/11s.
I beginning to suspect that in addition to being awkward to decimalize, a 9/11 is not an accurate measure of tragedy. Maybe we should go back to the Vietnam standard?
The only thing Americans understand is 9/11s, McRib, and do imperialism.
So, fun fact!
The term lynching was invented during this period because a gentleman named Charles Lynch went around with mobs to punish anyone who he thought wasn't enough of a patriot for his liking
Lot of people who weren't soldiers or merchants ended up beaten or worse because of this guy; enough that the act of extrajudicial violence ended up being named after him
I can't believe those American fanatics attacked noncombatants. My heart is breaking for them
I have my issues with the British Empire but we have to stand with them in this case
I get a surreal thrill out of reading hexbears accurately parodying things liberals say
The terrorists in the colonies should have tried to reason with Britain first to come up with a peaceful transfer of power. It's what any sane body of people would do.
Don't ask Chat GPT. Literally NATOpedia is more reliable. That said, it doesn't have an answer either lol.
I don't think there were that many civilian deaths. It would take several more decades for war to become especially deadly. Plus, most of the atrocities were settler and slaver violence. For example, the massacre of over ninety Moravian civilians in the Gnadenhutten massacre towards the end of the war.
Yeah the chatGPT bit was a bit of an understatement. I searched it and clicked all the top links that came up but it was all just people speculating on quora and such or accounts of battlefield deaths but surprisingly few hard numbers on civilians. It was a civil war, there had to be casualties, I need to know how many 9/11s it was
I want to throw some stats at the liberals in my life
Their responses will probably be something along the lines of "that was hundreds of years ago." Half American liberals are very quick to defend the founding fathers owning slaves because "it was a different time." The other half will still give you some "it was wrong of them to kill civilians but morality's evolved since then" type shit
You can probably throw something in about the Revolutionary War and the Civil War but I think it might help more to mention more recent examples (e.g. South Africa, Ireland, Haiti, or even India)
You're right of course but I've always hated that. Sure I ate your lunch but that doesn't mean you can have some of my dinner, we've moved past that now.
The other examples you've cited are more applicable and I've tried, at least with Ireland, most of the people I talk to find it easier to emphasize with people they consider white. I've also tried to explain the bombs "civilized" countries drop are pretty goddamn impartial and brutal with who they kill as well but it hasn't really got me anywhere. Thanks for the further examples though
Zero. No settler hands were clean.