AI for Creating Lists of Terms for Software Manuals and Translations

User manuals for software typically make use of terms that were used during screen design for the software. Such lists of terms are especially useful if the software is to be internationalized. For a project I am working on to create such documentation, I was unable to come up with such a list.

Casting about to find a way to address the issue of how to proceed without a list of terms. I contemplated simply compiling a list from the documentation itself, which I did in French. The results were less than satisfactory. My thinking then turned to having the translators for each of the three languages review the first section in hopes that this process might suggest the terms to be added. That effort also met with challenges.

Remembering the 106 screenshots that we have for the software in all four languages, a solution for a reasonable approach began to take shape. Returning to the idea of collecting the needed terms from those screenshots, I quickly realized it would be a daunting task to do this manually. This approach would also be one fraught with the possibility of many mistakes.

I recently posted about my project to do automatic handwriting recognition on a journal my wife kept for many years while our children were young. After setting that aside due to challenges encountered two years ago, I decided to try again a couple of weeks ago and was nothing short of astounded at what I found.

With that in mind last week and wanting to find a solution for the list of terms I needed, it hit me that I could get generative AI tools to do optical character recognition on the 106 screenshots in four languages to produce the needed list. After a quick couple of successful experiments submitting screenshots via the Web interface and retrieving the needed text, I was impressed. That success led to the realization of what it would take to go through that process with the 424 images involved. What was needed was a program to submit screenshots, retrieve the results, and then match terms from English to the other three languages.

I then worked with Google’s Gemini, to set up access to the system’s API (Application Programming Interface). Gemini helped me create a program in Python to submit the 424 images to Gemini’s large language model and receive a total of over 2,000 terms in each language. Then came the daunting task of matching up those terms across languages. I had a couple of unsuccessful attempts, the result of asking the AI to match terms in two lists of over 2000 items each. I suggested a divide and conquer approach, but that did not help. The firstg couple of attempts met with total failure. Indeed, one of the systems AI simply provided some code and a dozen terms. Another simply responded that it could do what was need needed, but it then abandoned the task with no further explanation. Yet another (the Chinese DeepSeek system running on Groq hardware to accelerate processing) generated an incredibly lengthy explanation of the difficulty of what I was asking. The response to the same prompt I had supplied the other systems began with this:

Okay, so I need to figure out how to solve this problem where I have to calculate the number of ways to arrange some objects with certain constraints. Let me try to break it down step by step. First, I remember that when dealing with permutations and combinations, the key is to understand whether the order matters and if there are any restrictions. In this case, the problem involves arranging objects where some are identical and others are different, and there are specific constraints on their positions. Hmm, so let’s say I have a total of n objects. Out of these, there are some identical objects and some that are distinct. For example, maybe I have 3 identical red balls and 2 distinct blue balls. The problem might ask how many ways I can arrange these balls in a line or a circle, considering that some positions are restricted. Wait, the user didn’t specify the exact problem, but I think I should consider a general approach. Let me think of a common scenario. Suppose we have n objects where there are duplicates and some specific constraints, like certain objects must be placed in particular positions or can’t be placed next to each other.

That was the first of FOURTEEN pages of explanation! Needless to say, more work was needed on the approach I was taking. 😊

The good news is that the failures I encountered prompted me to come up with an approach that worked. I returned to Gemini for help creating code in Python to submit the English screenshots one at a time, doing the matching across the other three languages. The procesing included and saving the results into an Excel file, which resulted in 2,382 entries. After using Excel to remove the duplicates, 368 items remained, with some cleanup still needed. Et voilà!!

The following illustrates screenshot illustrates user error on my part. I made a mistake and used an up-to-date set of English screenshots, but the list of screenshots for the other languages were out of date.

This once again proves the old GIGO adage, “Garbage in, garbage out!”

Posted in Generative AI | Leave a comment

AI for Converting Handwriting to Digital Text

ChatGPT became publicly available on 30 November 2023, and my software-engineer grandson mentioned it to me a few days later. Ever since, I have been amazed over and over at the power of these incredible AI tools that have become available. During the ensuing months, I have shifted from ChatGPT from OpenAI, to Claude from Anthropic, to Grok from xAI, moving over time from one to the other and back again.

I first subscribed to ChatGPT, which I later cancelled for my move to Claude. I have now cancelled that subscription to move to SimTheory (https://simtheory.ai/). The switch was prompted by being able with this service to gain access to many of the models available today through several sites. (I have listed those here.) I also still use several of the popular models directly in the “free” mode, often reaching the limit available to that tier. These include Gemini from Google and Copilot from Microsoft, and Gemini seems to be leading the pack at the moment.

I make extensive use of these various tools to support the software development I do for the service mission in which I am engaged for my church (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints). I have not settled on one particular model, and the progress I have seen over the past two-plus years has been incredible. It is amazing to see how much more is possible now than at the beginning. Since the beginning, all the major systems have added capabilities like the submission of screenshots, several code files, and an interactive process that is totally amazing.

My 56 years of programming experience is obviously important and has enabled me to learn how to put these tools to work. At this point it is an understatement to say that I am able to function at a level of software engineering that is FAR BEYOND what I would be able to do on my own. While the progress I have seen has been enormous, it has also been gradual, albeit rapid. With that, the leap forward I have seen today has been nothing if not incredibly astounding!

Indeed, this example is mind boggling, to say the least. Rather than being an experience related to programming, however, this development is in the area of handwriting recognition. This effort started also in 2023 with family records and journals. I use OCR on Adobe Acrobat Pro for scanned typed and printed documents. For handwriting, however, something else was needed. I discovered Transkribus, described by Wikipedia as “a platform for the text recognition, image analysis and structure recognition of historical documents” (See https://www.transkribus.org/). That system is amazing, but it requires the scanning and training with at least 50 pages of text.

About that same time, I was using Claude and tried it for handwriting recognition with a journal my wife, Annie, kept from 1977 to 1989. Filled with many stories of our experiences and adventures with our family, this is a veritable treasure that we want to share with our children and grandchildren. She is French, so it is written in French, in her beautiful script that takes some getting used to. Here is a page:

What has totally blown me away today, is the comparison that I just discovered between what Claude (and the others I tried as well!) produced in June of 2023 and what it created today. To show this to Annie, I created a side-by-side Word document to show to her. Needless to say, she was impressed. Indeed, she reviewed and corrected the Word document of the three full pages from her journal and found only 6 corrections that needed to be made in the 847 words from the three pages.

When I thought about posting something about this amazing development, I remembered that not everyone reads French. To address that issue, I came with the idea of using AI to create a side-by-side version how the ability to recognize handwritten text has improved significantly. I wanted to use colors to create a display for the comparison of the 2023 version and the one from today.

To do that, I submitted the Word document to AI, specifically this time to Gemini 2.5 Pro from Google. BTW, many experts are raving about this most recent effort from Google, which so far I am finding quite impressive. Gemini helped me come up with the comparison I wanted by providing the code to display the results on a page here in WordPress.

I will write later about that process in a more detailed post, but the full comparison of these first three journal pages is available at this link. In the meantime, here is an excerpt from the first page from that comparison:

Posted in Geeky Stuff, Generative AI | Leave a comment

Was the FBI Russia collusion probe a symptom of the intelligence state as outlined by Mike Benz?

The recent release of the FBI files on Russia collusion caught my attention yesterday. Along with many others, now-independent, Emmy-winning investigative journalist Catherine Herridge is reporting on the story:

Herridge has proven to be more than reliable during her career at ABC News, Fox News, and recently at CBS News. She was laid off from CBS supposedly due to budget cuts, but some say it was because her reporting was a serious bother to too many people.

This story got me thinking about Mike Benz, whose work came to my attention a year ago with an interview he did with Tucker Calson. Since then, he has been interviewed by well-known podcaster/journalist folks such as Joe Rogan, Caroline Glick, and Shawn Ryan. He also gave a presentation at Hillsdale College last September.

He has had that pinned to his feed on X for some time now, and I finally got around to listening to most of it yesterday while walking the dog. It seems important enough now that I am planning to watch so I can see his slides.

RealClearPolitics has posted the X-based video of the interview along with the timeline and transcript:

1:19: The Inauguration of Organized Political Warfare
11:20: NSC 10/2 and the Plausible Deniability Doctrine
15:08: Diplomacy Thru Duplicity
16:04: Smith-Mundt Act, The CIA Media Empire
19:40: The Department of Dirty Tricks
20:36: The CIA As Servant Of The State Department
23:02: 1789-1948 pre-history
29:54: 1948-1983

The whole piece really is worth watching. For anyone short on time, I gave the entire transcript to Grok from xAI with the request for a summary. Here is what it provided:

Mike Benz’s presentation at Hillsdale College outlines the concept of the “intelligence state,” where intelligence agencies, originally meant to serve the state, have overtaken it, operating with significant autonomy and influence. He traces its origins to 1948, a pivotal year marked by the establishment of the CIA and George Kennan’s memo, “The Inauguration of Organized Political Warfare.” This memo, declassified in 2005, followed the CIA’s first major operation—rigging Italy’s 1948 election to favor a U.S.-backed candidate over a Soviet-supported one. The operation involved $250 million in covert funding, propaganda through media like Voice of America, and alliances with churches, charities, and even the mafia, turning these entities into instruments of statecraft.

Benz highlights how Kennan’s vision, formalized in National Security Council Memo 10/2, authorized covert operations like propaganda, sabotage, and subversion, with “plausible deniability” as a core principle. This allowed the U.S. government to deny responsibility for illegal activities, fostering an “empire of lies” both abroad and domestically. The 1948 Smith-Mundt Act initially restricted propaganda within the U.S., but its 2013 amendment allowed government-made news to reach American audiences, weakening safeguards.

The CIA expanded its influence globally, orchestrating 85 regime changes post-Italy, with 50 during the Eisenhower era. By the 1960s, domestic operations like COINTELPRO and Operation Chaos targeted leftist movements, mirroring current efforts against populism. Scandals in the 1970s led to the Church Committee, exposing CIA abuses like assassination tools and media manipulation, prompting temporary reforms under Jimmy Carter. However, Ronald Reagan’s administration restored CIA powers, notably through the National Endowment for Democracy, embedding intelligence operations in NGOs, media, and cultural institutions.

Benz argues the intelligence state isn’t rogue but serves the State Department and Pentagon, executing their agendas while maintaining deniability. He compares it to a mafia structure, with the CIA as enforcers for diplomatic and defense elites. Today, this “blob” counters domestic populism, repurposing Cold War tactics to control narratives and suppress dissent, creating a tension between the American homeland and the global empire’s interests.

So, what are the chances the FBI Russia collusion probe was a symptom of the intelligence state as outlined by Mike Benz? When taken with other things that have happened and are happening, the chances seem to be increasingly high.

Posted in Current Events, Generative AI | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Malicious Compliance

A friend recently posted his objection on Facebook to the fact that the US Naval Academy had removed 381 books from its library. The comments on the post were quite interesting, and the wide spectrum of opinions expressed made me want to learn more. Reports from various news sources confirmed that books had in fact been removed. Less certain was the precise source of the order to remove the books.

The removal was supposedly done in response to directives received from the Department of Defense. According to reports, the goal of these directives was for all units and agencies to review all training materials and remove instruction on topics related to “diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI). I quickly came across what appears to be the actual directive on a DoD Web site.

This document was sent with the subject line “Digital Content Refresh” and contained the sentence, “Components must take all practicable steps, consistent with records management requirements, to remove all DoD news and feature articles, photos, and videos that promote Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI).” The directive refers to Web sites, but it does not mention library books,. This left the development at Annapolis an open question.

Additional searching did not uncover any evidence that library books had been removed at the US Military Academy or at the US Air Force Academy. With this discovery at Annapolis was nothing more than a case of malicious compliance that was designed to embarrass the current administration.

This is not the first time this has happened this year within the Department of Defense. In January, at least one Air Force unit removed instructional units about the World War II service of the famed Tuskegee Airman and the WASPs. Those events are described in this article in the Air and Space Forces Magazine.

About the time that these events were occurring, I came across a post on social media that was supposedly from a female former Army intelligence officer. She addressed “Service Academy Women” and gave them tips on how to “resist.” In addition, I found a reference to an older document from which this social media post might have been taken. Here are the two documents:

Wondering about the potential source of the older document, I submitted a query to three generative AI systems (Grok from xAI, Claude 3.7 from Anthropic, and Google’s Gemini 2.5 Pro. Grok suggested the excerpt might be from “The Screwtape Letters by C.S. Lewis, a 1942 satirical novel.” Claude and Gemini both concluded that the document was likely “an excerpt from the OSS Simple Sabotage Field Manual from 1944, specifically section (11a) “Organizations and Conferences.” Gemini provided this summary:

In essence, the second image adapts and repackages WWII-era sabotage techniques, originally intended for use against enemy organizations, as methods for internal resistance within modern military or government structures. The core methods of using bureaucracy, procedure, and communication to obstruct and delay remain the same, just presented in a contemporary context with updated language.

The purpose of malicious compliance such as this is to generate negative views towards the current administration. Seeing that the comments on your post range from very positive to very negative, it is safe to say that this effort to foment dissension was successful. The endeavor was aided as per usual by mainstream media such as the New York Times, the source of the article that my friend posted. Unfortunately, it seems these types of occurrences are par for the course in the Age of Trump.

Posted in Current Events, Generative AI | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment