[seizethecheese]

Okay I’ll bite. The essay on raising children piqued my interest. The first two paragraphs:

> I never yet saw that father, but let his son be never so decrepit or deformed, would not, notwithstanding, own him: not, nevertheless, if he were not totally besotted, and blinded with his paternal affection, that he did not well enough discern his defects: but that with all defaults, he was still his. Just so, I see better than any other, that all I write here are but the idle reveries of a man that has only nibbled upon the outward crust of sciences in his nonage, and only retained a general and formless image of them; who has got a little snatch of everything and nothing of the whole, à la Françoise.

This does not seem “updated” or “modern”.

Updating these old texts seems like a perfect use case for AI. Let’s give GPT 4o a shot:

> I have never seen a father, no matter how frail or deformed his son may be, who would not still claim him as his own. Yet, unless completely blinded by paternal affection, the father is fully aware of his son’s flaws. Despite those shortcomings, the son remains his child. In the same way, I am more aware than anyone else that what I write here is nothing more than the idle musings of someone who, in his youth, only skimmed the surface of knowledge. I have retained only a vague and incomplete impression of the sciences, having dabbled a little in everything but mastered nothing—true to the French way.

Much better!

[octed]

The author of the website has mentioned that

> I am slowly replacing the Cotton/Hazlitt translation with a contemporary one and adding new notes

So I would assume that the essay you're talking about is from the earlier Cotton translation and has still not been replaced.

This is the first time I've seen AI being used to "modernize" old texts, and it works wonderfully in this case; though a bit of the old-timey charm is lost imo. I used to read a translation that I'd found in my university library which I enjoyed a lot. Very readable but still retained the "feel" of a 16th century book. I don't recall the translator unfortunately.

[RobPfeifer]

Totally right. The art and science of translation is an age-old debate and where AI isn’t super well suited. We’re not at a point where it ends up more than a summary but the point is the proper “translation” of the tone, subtle intent and idiosyncrasies of the author. That said, most human translators take license (e.g. The Bible) and how do we counterweight against their flaws, so there’s not a great answer here.

Except I hope the guy works through it and does a good job cause the original is a bit of a slog!

[mkoubaa]

Old timey charm is overrated. I want to get to the point.

The use of AI here is really cool and I hope to see it applied to other older tomes

[octed]

Unfortunately I still have a soft spot for beautiful writing. The "point" often sticks better when it is expressed eloquently. Having to think a little bit to get to the point also helps with absorbing it, at least in my experience.

[mkoubaa]

Well nobody is saying to incinerate the originals

[a2800276]

Did you translate the original French to modern English or modernize the new translation?

I wonder how those would compare. Translating the original would probably be the 'correct' thing to do, from a literary point of view. Poses some interesting question, though.

[l3x4ur1n]

For a non native English speaker the "translation" is much more readable and can convey more information to me. The old text is kind of comprehensible to me, but I have to read really slow, re-read parts and think a lot to understand.

[alldayhaterdude]

I disagree. This sucks.

[baudaux]

It is like repainting La Joconde

[NemoNobody]

name checks out