recklesstitle

THE YEARS OF DRIVING DANGEROUSLY

April 1, 1916 was a grand day in Santa Rosa as an estimated 20,000 visitors – “one of the largest [crowds] ever seen here,” boasted the Press Democrat – joined residents to cheer a parade of autos two miles long. No, it wasn’t the Rose Carnival (there wasn’t one that year) but “Safety First Day” organized by town bigwigs. Hyped as being the kickoff of a new national semi-holiday, six newsreel camera crews were on hand to record the doings.

There were all manner of safety-related demonstrations. Firemen extinguished a mock fire on the roof of the Santa Rosa Savings Bank, although there was a delay because a car was illegally parked in front of the hydrant. A PG&E lineman faked electrocution (!) and was given aid by a doctor and nurse who were part of the act, which was performed so convincingly that two doctors in the audience rushed up to help. The parade included two boys carrying an enormous model of a safety pin which was a real crowd-pleaser for some reason, and the Petaluma contingent included children dressed as chickens (of course).

MORE FROM THE ANNALS OF BAD DRIVING

10 MPH is Fast Enough, Mr. Speed Burner (1908)

Get Off the Sidewalk, I’m Driving Here (1909)

The Rules of the Road are Relative (1911)

Driving Like a Santa Rosan (1912)

When We Began Driving Like Maniacs (1913)

But the main focus of Safety First Day was “instructing people in the rules of the road and operating of automobiles to prevent accidents.” Earlier the San Francisco Examiner promoted the event with promises that “expert drivers of motor cars will give exhibitions of the right and wrong way of driving in the city streets…drivers will give an actual demonstration how automobiles should be operated to comply with the laws” and not to be left out, “pedestrians will also be taught how to cross the streets. Dummies will be used to show how the drivers of cars have to avoid the average pedestrian who never looks up or down the street before crossing.”

Luther Burbank and his new Willys-Knight five-passenger touring car were at the front of the parade, and afterwards the Examiner quoted his enthusiastic endorsement of the event. “Such a demonstration as this is amazing…if adopted nationally it would be one of the greatest benefits to humanity. I had no idea that it would be as good as this.”

Unfortunately, a few months later our Luther was involved in a safety mishap which could have ended tragically. He and Elizabeth were driving to the movies when he confused the accelerator with the brake pedal. The big car lurched over the curb, narrowly missed a pedestrian, then crashed through the display window of the White House department store at Fourth and B streets. Burbank parked and called store owner Bill Carithers (did Burbank just walk through the broken window to use their phone?) before he and his wife proceeded with their plans to watch a romantic melodrama and a British documentary on WWI combat.

Gentle Reader might expect the most famous guy in town crashing through a plate glass window of the most popular store in town would merit more than a 200 word item on page eight of the PD. But despite the enthusiasm shown on 1916’s Safety First Day, in the following years even serious accidents became so commonplace they became back page fillers – it was rare to open the paper and not find reports of drivers and passengers being hurled out of their seats, a car “turning turtle” (flipping over) or a pedestrian being struck.

In the same issue with Burbank’s broken window there were two other major incidents reported. A driver lost his front teeth when his face smashed into the steering wheel in a collision, and a man who had been charged three days earlier for drunk driving demolished his car after it plunged over a 100-foot embankment on the Rincon Grade.

If the Press Democrat and other newspapers seemed cavalier about reckless driving and serious auto accidents, it could be they were only taking cues from the courts. In Sonoma County traffic complaints were handled by Justice Marvin Vaughan, who was on the bench 1915-1931. But until 1922, apparently no one brought before him served jail time, no matter how terrible the offense. Fines usually ranged from $5 to $100, the determining factors seeming to be whether the driver was from out of town and/or drunk. (For reference, $10 in 1920 was worth about $150 today.) Here’s an example of his lenient sentencing:

In a head-on collision on Santa Rosa Ave one of the cars flipped over, pinning Santa Rosa’s Gnesa sisters inside. (Maybe it was a family curse – four years earlier, their brother was likewise a passenger in an accident that ended with the auto upside down.) The young women were not seriously injured which the crowd that gathered thought was something of a miracle, considering both cars were pretty well trashed.

But that wasn’t the only lucky surprise that Friday night. While people were gawking at the wreckage, a car driven by Julius Momsen of Petaluma sped through the crowd, somehow managing to not hit anyone. A high-speed chase by police ended with Momsen finally stopped on the outskirts of Petaluma.

Charged with driving recklessly through the crowd and speeding, Momsen was fined all of $20. While he might have also spent a month behind bars, Justice Vaughan allowed him to have his auto “jailed” for thirty days instead.

Judge Vaughan heard all sorts of cases besides traffic (my new favorite headline: “Youth Who Stole Tinfoil Released”) and while trials were sometimes held in his courtroom, few reckless drivers faced a jury. A rare exception was when George Hedrick was charged with nearly killing Hilda Brockelman; she was walking “several feet” off the side of the road when she was struck by his car. Her neck was broken and the trial delayed for several weeks as they waited for a special neck brace to arrive so she could leave the hospital to testify. The jury couldn’t decide (the split was 10-2, with two voting for acquittal) and Hedrick – whose only defense was that he had been blinded by oncoming headlights – was not retried.

Although this article just covers dangerous driving in the six years following Safety First Day, looking farther down the road it can be seen that serious accidents were ever increasing at an alarming rate. To get a rough idea of how it progressed, I searched the Press Democrat digital archives for “reckless driving”. From 86 hits in the 1910s it jumped to 1,314 during the 1920s.

References to "reckless driving" in the Press Democrat, 1915-1929
References to “reckless driving” in the Press Democrat, 1915-1929

While there are no official statistics for Sonoma County, we can be sure the true numbers were actually much higher. Those figures are inaccurate mainly because some combination of those two words appeared in less than half of the PD articles on the topic – recklessness was usually not mentioned because it was implied by the scenario. Also, lots of references were missed because the OCR text of the archive is mediocre, at best; in one case, it translated the headline “RECKLESS AUTOMOBILE DRIVING” into “BfiS JUTiIBBILE DRIVING” (go figure).

Driving too fast was always the main reason for accidents; state traffic law c. 1920 put the speed limit at 35, and then only when a thoroughfare was clear. A man near modern-day Rohnert Park clocked autos on the highway going 50-60 MPH but before you presume that’s still a reasonable speed, remember that cars a century ago were clunky. They were like cumbersome little tractors and keeping them on course was a constant physical fight with the steering wheel. They had no power brakes or power anything else and their pneumatic tires were forever blowing out.

Another frequent cause was not using lights after dark. Cars and trucks a century ago had carbide lamps, which had to be lit by hand and powered by a small acetylene gas tank usually mounted on the running board. Many articles about accidents mentioned a factor was having no tail light or just one working headlight, presumably to save acetylene fuel. In a 1920 incident a pair of brothers were headed home to Todd Road when their lights failed. Figuring they were close enough to make it the rest of the way by the moon they continued driving, only to have a head-on collision with another car driving in the dark.

Also mentioned by the PD were accidents caused by unskilled drivers cutting in (“if you are traveling 30 miles an hour, no other car has the right to pass you,” the paper reminded) and parents letting children under sixteen drive unsupervised. In my survey of the 1917-1922 local newspapers I didn’t find any mention of either causing an accident, but the PD and District Attorney cited these as serious problems.

Riffling through those old Press Democrats will turn up more than a few crazy stories that border Believe-it-or-Not! territory. In 1920 a Santa Rosa taxi driver and another fellow raced down the Sonoma Valley road while shooting at each other. The cabbie received “slight gunshot wounds” while the other man was taken to Judge Vaughan’s courtroom. The fine for driving too fast while blasting away at someone on a public highway was $50.

And remember the driver who crashed his car on the Rincon Grade the same day as Luther Burbank’s accident? His drunk driving arrest three days earlier was for trying to knock a streetcar off the tracks at Fourth and E streets.

There was also an alarming uptick in hit-and-run incidents starting in 1920, which I suspect was related to the enactment of Prohibition. Drunk driving was likewise on the increase and a year earlier the state had made it a felony. While Justice Vaughan can be found reducing intoxication charges to merely careless driving, no judge would be lenient with drunken yahoos who run over people. Sure, some might have been so snockered as to not realize a person had been hit, but it seems more likely many were hoping to get away without being caught in bad shape at the scene. (Fun fact: “Drunken yahoos” dates back to 1810 England and coined to mock the king’s counsellors.)

It grew so bad by 1922 even Vaughan started handling out jail time. After a hit-and-run driver struck 9 year-old Virginia Bufford while walking home from the Todd district elementary school, the judge sentenced him to a week in the county jail. Not much, but he said his decision was mitigated by the child not being seriously injured and the driver giving $55 to her family.

But the number of serious accidents kept escalating through the year, culminating in four deaths during the autumn including a Civil War vet killed as he was crossing the street in Healdsburg. One of the other victims died via a hit-and-run. There were four other hit-and-run injuries around the same time.

Following those incidents, in December 1922 District Attorney Hoyle published an unusual open letter in the Press Democrat calling for the county courts to crackdown on dangerous drivers:

“In practically every one of these cases the cause is traceable to carelessness, and in almost even case of such carelessness the person knew he was violating the law…Small fines amount to nothing. It is an indirect way of licensing these violations of the law…I shall therefore ask the magistrates of the county in all cases of these more serious violations of the Motor Vehicle act to impose prison sentences instead of fines…”

These problems were by no means unique to us; reckless driving had become a nationwide crisis and nobody had a solution. Officials like DA Hoyle said the answer was stiffer laws; preachers said it was a morality problem spurred by Demon Rum; pundits were inching their way towards calling the young people who were usually the culprits as the Roaring 20s “Lost Generation.” But in the meantime, many cities experimented with shaming the offenders.

Cartoon appearing in the October 28, 1922 Press Democrat
Cartoon appearing in the October 28, 1922 Press Democrat

The PD and other papers ran articles and photo spreads of Detroit drivers being taken to hospital wards of children who had been hit. Speedsters in Cleveland were escorted to a 7 year-old girl’s burial under police guard and Los Angeles offenders scrubbed jail floors by hand. Did any of this slow down the increase in reckless driving? Look again at the chart above.

I decided to cut this horrific driving survey off at the end of 1922 because it was a watershed moment when some actually believed this problem could be solved. There may someday be a “Years of Driving Dangerously II” that continues this series but frankly, I’m not sure I have the stomach for all that mayhem.

 

(1921 title photo courtesy of the Boston Public Library, Leslie Jones Collection)

 

sources
 

SANTA ROSA HAS 1ST SAFETY 1ST DAY IN STATE
What Stuart Gayness, Automobile Editor of The Examiner, Has to Say of Tomorrow’s Big Event
(By Stuart Gayness)

Big preparations are being made for the “Safety First” day celebration which will be observed Saturday at Santa Rosa.

The City of Roses will give over the entire day to practical demonstrations of the safety first rules for motorists, pedestrians and drivers of horse-drawn vehicles. This will be the first event of its kind ever held in California, and because of the possibilities it offers for the education of the public in the safety first campaign it will probably be followed by similar events in other cities throughout the country.

Expert drivers of motor cars will give exhibitions of the right and wrong way of driving in the city streets. They will show how each driver of a machine should obey the State and city traffic laws. How the drivers should stop and let passengers alight on the sidewalks, how close to drive to a street car and when to stop for other vehicles. In fact, the drivers will give an actual demonstration how automobiles should be operated to comply with the laws and at the same time co-operate with the safety first campaign.

Pedestrians will also be taught how to cross the streets. Dummies will be used to show how the drivers of cars have to avoid the average pedestrian who never looks up or down the street before crossing. It is hoped by the Santa Rosa authorities to impress the public so strongly with the necessity of obeying the traffic laws that the safety first day will be a big factor in reducing the number of accidents in that city.

Because it places before the drivers of vehicles and the pedestrian an unusual opportunity of realizing how they endanger their lives, the safety first day would be a good idea for all cities. If every city in the country would hold an annual safety first day, at which time drivers of cars and horse-drawn vehicles and pedestrians would be shown how to follow the safety first rules, it would be a most important step in the elimination of accidents.

– Press Democrat, March 31 1916

 

RECKLESS DRIVE ACROSS STREETS
Collision of Cars at Fifth and B Streets — The Law Should Be Better Observed.

Fast driving at street intersections resulted in an auto accident at Fifth and B streets Thursday afternoon, shortly before 5 o’clock when Will Harris, driving a Ford truck, collided with John Keith of San Francisco, driving a small roadster, as the latter was crossing Fifth.

Harris’ car was turned completely around and an elderly gentleman, riding with Harris, was thrown out but the occupants of both cars escaped injury. What was still strange is the fact that neither car was damaged other than slight dents on the fenders.

The accident was witnessed by a number of people and a crowd quickly gathered. Mr. Harris admitted he was driving at a speed which made it impossible for him to stop when he saw Keith who had the right of way come into sight, despite the fact that he made every effort to do so.

The law is being generally ignored in Santa Rosa relative to street in intersections and it is marvelous that more serious accidents do not occur. Some one is going to be killed or maimed for life and then there will be something done to stop the unlawful speed used by auto drivers at practically every street corner.

The law is plain and distinct in giving the man to your right the right of way and it is the duty of all drivers to watch their right side and see that they keep clear of all cars coming from that direction while on the road as well as to reduce speed to ten miles per hour at intersections.

– Press Democrat, June 29 1917

 

DRIVES AUTO INTO AN ELECTRIC CAR
D. C. Hoffman, While Intoxicated, Tears Step off Street Car and Rips off the Side of His Automobile When He Endeavors to Bump Bigger Machine off the Track Saturday Night — Man Arrested.

D. C. Hoffman was arrested by Police Officers William Shaffer and George W. Matthews on Saturday night, charged with driving an automobile while in an intoxicated condition.

Hoffman, who had two other men with him, tried to bump the outgoing electric train at Fourth and E streets off the track. The motormän saw a reckless driver was approaching and stopped his car so as to avoid accident. Hoffman drove his auto into the electric car. tore off one of the side steps and ripped off the side of his automobile.

The charge of operating an automobile while in an intoxicated condition is a very serious one.

– Press Democrat, November 11 1917

 

AUTO JUMPS INTO A BIG WINDOW
Luther Burbank Puts Foot on What He Thought Was the Brake—Instead It Was “More Gas,” and Car Goes Through White House Window.

Luther Burbank accidentally drove his auto into one of the plate glass windows on the B street front of the White House shortly after 7 o’clock Wednesday evening. The big glass was shattered but beyond that no damage was done.

Mr. Burbank with his wife had driven down town to attend the Cline to see the British tanks in operation. As he drove up to the curb to park his machine he placed his foot on the brake pedal as he supposed, and when the curb was reached jammed it down hard.

The result was far from his expectations. Instead of it being the foot brake he had placed his foot on the accelerator lever and when ready to stop had given the engine a full charge of gasoline causing it to jump forward, mount the curb and dash into the window.

The error was quickly corrected but the damage was done. A man passing narrowly escaped being caught in the wild jump of the car. Both Mr. and Mrs. Burbank sat and quietly surveyed the wreck and then, without a word of comment, Mr. Burbank reversed the machine and backed it out and off the sidewalk to its place in the street at the curb. Both alighted and went to the theatre after notifying W. R. Carithers of the accident.

– Press Democrat, November 15 1917

 

Pays Fine of $25 for Reckless Auto Driving

Earl Ronshimer of Penngrove, charged with reckless driving when he visited Occidental last week, when a companion shot up the town, paid a fine of $25 in Justice Vaughan’s court yesterday.

– Press Democrat, January 5 1918

 

AUTO OWNERS IGNORE LAWS
Speeding, Head and Tail Lights, Children Driving Cars, Are Some of the More Common Infractions Which May Result in Arrest and Fines.

An auto driver was fined $5 Thursday for speeding on Humboldt avenue. He was caught, but many others escape the fine because officers cannot be everywhere at once.

Many auto owners are violating the laws by running at night with only one light in front. The law calls for two as well as a tail light. Officers will arrest all caught ignoring the law relative to lights.

Much complaint is made regarding the practice of owners allowing young children to drive their cars. Boys and girls under 16 are frequently seen driving about town and country without an older person on the front seat with them, which is unsafe and against the state law.

– Press Democrat, September 6 1918

 

Suggested Remedy for Reckless Auto Driving

A contributor to a San Francisco daily makes a practical suggestion for the prevention of reckless and careless driving of autos which might be put into effect with good results. He says:

To insure sobriety and carefulness, it might be advisable to revive a perfectly good law that was enforced in Athens The edict provided that a ferryman or other person engaged in transportation. who put in jeopardy the life of a Greek, such person, after being adequately punished, was forbidden ever again to ply his trade, under penalty of death. To deprive these drunken yahoos of their autos would be just and would be to them a more severe punishment than hanging.

– Press Democrat, September 19 1918

 

The Supervisors deprecated the dismissal of some cases in which speed violators had been allowed by certain magistrates to go with a warning when in the opinion of witnesses the punishment should have been severe. It is planned to put a check upon reckless driving, specially on the state highway, and this matter had better be understood by motorists. The two traffic officers have been cautioned to be vigilant and there is no mistake that they are.

– Press Democrat, September 21 1918

 

TAXI AND AUTOMOBILE IN COLLISION YESTERDAY

Reckless driving of machines in the streets of Santa Rosa is a common sight, and despite many arrests and fines in the past the practice is maintained by certain drivers, who appear to have no regard for their own safety or that of others.

Yesterday afternoon, what was described a racing taxi, crashed into the Ford auto of Richard Davis at Humboldt as the taxi was racing for the S. P. depot, upset the Ford and smashed it into a mass of ruins, narrowly escaping killing Mr. and Mrs. Davis and their three children.

The top was entirely torn to pieces, the glass windshield was crushed into fragments, a case of eggs was scattered and crushed over the car and inmates, while the occupants were buried under the car and debris. For a time it was believed a babe had been killed owing to the cries of the frightened and bruised mother, but this proved untrue.

The family was taken into the home of Justice and Mrs. M. T. Vaughan and a physician summoned, who quieted the shocked family and found that no bones had been broken. Mr. Davis appeared to be the worst injured, but it is believed he escaped any serious injury, although all suffered a terrible nervous shock. Every one who witnessed the accident agrees that the taxicab was driving at a reckless gait and was unable to stop when it was seen that an accident would occur.

– Press Democrat, December 25 1918

 

SERIOUS CHARGE AGAINST DRIVER
James Aquistapace Arrested for Driving While Intoxicated — Narrowly Escaped Injuring Machine Loaded With Family When He Ran on to Sidewalk on Mendocino Avenue.

James Aquistapace was arrested Sunday afternoon charged with operating an automobile while intoxicated. Witnesses who saw him drive up Fifth street declare that he would undoubtedly killed Mr. Meacham, wife and baby, who were driving out Mendocino street, had he not hit the iron policeman in the street, which deflected his course sufficient to make him hit the Meacham car a glancing blow. Aquistapace went on down Mendocino avenue on the sidewalk to Fourth street before getting his car stopped.

Traffic officers placed the man under arrest and Monday he was taken before Justice Vaughan and arraigned. He asked for time to secure an attorney. Later he returned represented by Attorney Fulwider and his hearing was set for Friday morning at 10 o’clock. Aquistapace refused to answer any questions propounded by the Judge until they had been explained by one of his countrymen in his own language.

– Press Democrat, March 18 1919

 

JUDGE ‘UP TREE’ AS TO DISPOSITION OF AUTO HE SEIZED

After relieving J. Momsen of Petaluma of the use of his automobile for thirty days Monday, Judge Vaughan is now in a quandary as to what to do with the machine.

He has no garage of his own in which to keep the car and he could not pay storage bill at a garage out of the fine money collected. On last reports he has about decided to pass the buck to Sheriff Petray and place the machine in his charge for safekeeping for the time.

Momsen was fined $20 and relieved of his machine on two charges, one exceeding the speed limit and another of reckless driving preferred against him by Traffic Officer Long.

His arrest grew out of his driving recklessly through the crowd gathered about the accident south of town Friday evening and the subsequent chase he gave the traffic officer, who caught him on the outskirts of Petaluma.

In line with the policy of increasing severity of fines the judge decided to try jailing the machine rather than the defendant. However, in the case Momsen was given the choice of going to jail himself for relinquishing his machine for the period and he chose the latter.

– Press Democrat, March 30, 1920

 

SPEEDERS TO BE CURBED HERE BY MOTOR OFFICER
Council Votes Month’s Trial in Effort to Stop Reckless Driving

The city council at the mid-month meeting last night authorized Chief of Police Matthews to appoint a traffic officer with a motorcycle to watch autoists and see that the laws of city and state were better obeyed within the city limits.

The action was taken on the request of the Chief, who declared it was impossible for a policeman on foot or a bicycle to catch an autoist, and with the greatly increased traffic of the sumner months such an officer was badly needed.

The Mayor and several of the councilmen endorsed the plan and it was declared that such an officer would more than earn his salary in restricting careless and reckless drivers on the city streets. When asked if he could get a man the Chief said he had a man in view who understood his business. It was decided to try the plan out for a month and if it proved successful to keep him on all summer.

– Press Democrat, May 19 1920

 

TWO SPEEDING AUTO DUELISTS TO FACE COURT

Warrants for reckless driving have been sworn out in the Sonoma justice court against Constantino (Scotty) Maggiori of Santa Rosa and George F. Blanco of Vallejo, who figured in a sensational racing and shooting episode last week on the road near El Verano.

The warriors have been placed in the hands of Constable Jack Murray, with instructions to see that both men are brought into court. Indignation in the Sonoma valley has been running high since the two men took turns in passing each other at high speed and in exchanging shots on a public highway.

Maggiori, a Santa Rosa taxi-cab driver, suffered slight gunshot wounds, while his opponent in the racing and shooting was fined $50 in the Santa Rosa Justice court.

– Press Democrat, August 3 1920

 

BOY’S LEG BROKEN IN AUTO ACCIDENT

Raymond King, 13-year-old son of Mrs. R. King of Rincon Valley, was run down by a Ford truck on the Rincon valley road Friday morning and suffered a broken leg, and the officers are looking for B. H. Cook, who was charged with reckless driving and striking the child and failing to stop and give assistance.

The boy was brought into Santa Rosa and taken to a hospital following the accident. George M. Hansen, county traffic officer, made some inquiries into the accident and then swore to the complaint against Cook, and the warrant was issued in justice court by Judge Marvin T. Vaughan.

– Press Democrat, October 9 1920

 

LIGHTLESS CARS COLLIDE IN DARK
Callisa Brothers Injured Saturday Night in Collision Near Kenwood, One in Hospital

Joseph Callisa was taken to the General hospital Saturday evening, with a broken knee cap, as the result of an automobile accident which occurred near Kenwwood after dark. Louis Callisa, a brother also suffered several cuts on the nose and over his left eyebrow as a result of the collision.

The two brothers have been working at Vallejo and were on their way to the Todd District to visit their parents. Shorty after dark their lights went out for some inexplicable cause and they thought they could manage the rest of the distance, it being only about ten miles farther to their destination, without lights.

When about seven miles from Santa Rosa they collided with another machine in the dark. The second lightless machine was said to have been owned by a resident of Kenwood. Both machines were badly damaged in the smash but the occupants of the second car escaped injury.

Louis Callisa was able to proceed home after having his cuts attended by a Santa Rosa physician. His brother will be confined to the hospital for several days.

– Press Democrat, October 10 1920

 

Washington, Dec 8 – A total of 3,808 persons were killed in automobile accidents, or died as a result of injuries therefrom during the last year, the census bureau announced today in a statement offering suggestions for traffic improvement automobile accident death rate of 14.1 out of every 100,000 population was reported in 1919, an increase over every year since 1915 when the rate was 8.0 and an increase of 245 in the total number of deaths of 1918.

 

A SANTA ROSA MAN timed several automobiles traveling between 50 and 60 miles an hour at a point between Wilfred and Cotati Sunday afternoon. He secured the numbers of eight machines, one right after the other, traveling at least 15 miles an hour over the legal rate of speed…

– Press Democrat, February 17 1921

 

WOMAN WITH NECK BROKEN FAILS TO CONVINCE JURORS

The jury hearing the case of G. W. Hedrick, charged with reckless driving, tried in the Justice court before Judge Marvin T. Vaughan, disagreed and was discharged Thursday. The jury stood 10 for conviction and two for acquittal at the time it was discharged.

The case will come up for new trial soon Judge Vaughan stated Thursday.

Hedrick is charged with reckless driving on the highway between this city and Bellevue. The complaint states that he ran down Mrs. Hilda Brockelman who was walking south on the highway. Mrs. Brockelman’s neck was broken in the accident. She claims that at the time she was struck she was walking several feet to one side of the highway.

Hedrick claims that the lights of the car that he passed just before he hit Mrs. Brockelman blinded him and he did not see her. Mrs. Brockelman, who has been in a local hospital since the accident, was one of the witnesses for the prosecution Thursday, appearing in court with a special brace on her neck.

– Press Democrat, July 8 1921

 

Our Careless Pedestrians

Most of the criticism directed against reckless driving is just, and most accidents are the result of carelessness in driving. But it is absurd to make assumption that the driver is always responsible when he bumps into a pedestrian.

It has been seriously proposed in one city that killing of a pedestrian by an automobile should lead automatically to the punishment of the driver for murder. That would be as tragic a travesty on justice as to apply the same rule to railroad accidents, and always sentence the engineer for murder without hearing the evidence.

Every pedestrian knows that the community is full of careless drivers, and every motorist knows that the community is full of careless walkers. The driver of a car has the superior obligation to look out for the other fellow, because in case of a collision it is the other fellow who is likely to get hurt. But the pedestrian certainly shares the responsibility for avoiding a collision. It is up to him to take reasonable precautions for his own safety, and also to realize that even a citizen driving an automobile has traffic rights which a fellow-citizen on foot ought to respect.

– Press Democrat, December 28 1921

 

FRATES PLEADS HIS INNOCENCE
Man Accused of Running Down Little Girl Released on Bail of $250.

Frank Frates, who was arrested on a complaint of Miss Irene Sink, school teacher in the Todd district, charged with reckless driving and with running down little Virginia Bufford a few days ago, pleaded not guilty when brought before Judge Marvin T. Vaughan yesterday.

Frates was released on $250 bonds and is to appear in court again this morning to have a date set for the trial.

The little girl was at first thought to have been seriously injured, but it later developed that she was only slightly injured, and will soon be over her injuries.

The Bufford girl was returning from school to her home, walking along the highway when struck by a passing automobile, which did not stop. The license of the car, as taken by witnesses, is said to have corresponded with one issued to Frates.

– Press Democrat, February 1 1922

 

Jail Sentence for Reckless Driver

SANTA ROSA, Feb. 9. Frank Frates, accused of reckless driving, resulting in injuring a small girl near the Todd school, recently pleaded guilty to the charge before Justice M. T. Vaughan in the Justice court today and was sentenced to seven days in the county jail.

Frates had given the parents of the girl $55 and the court took into consideration his attitude to the parents in basing a decision. The court stated, however, that the reimbursing of the parents did not wholly satisfy the penalty for a criminal complaint.

Judge Vaughan stated following the trial, that the sentence was in line with the court’s policy to attempt to stock [sp] reckless automobile driving in the county.

– Petaluma Daily Morning Courier, February 10 1922

 

Santa Rosa Youths In Petaluma Trouble

PETALUMA. April 8. Two Santa Rosa youths, said to have been drinking, were brought to town under arrest last night by Jack H. Kreitler, the well known highway official, and taken before Justice J. P. Gallagher, who fined them $50 each.

The youths were driving an auto in a reckless manner and drove through the barricades erected where repairs are under way, smashing lantern and barriers. One lantern still clung to their car when it reached this city.

They did not know how they got here or what they had been doing and both were very penitent and admitted their great wrong. They were allowed to return home, but not to drive their car. This is declared to be their first offense. Both are members of prominent families of Santa Rosa and both have good reputations, hence their names were withheld from publication.

– Press Democrat, April 9 1922

 

RECKLESSNESS MUST HALT

To The Press Democrat: Please grant me a little space in your valuable paper upon a very important subject.

Life is short at best, yet many a life is snuffed out prematurely either through the carelessness of himself or others. Within the last two weeks many automobile accidents have occurred in this county and people have been maimed and killed. In practically every one of these cases the cause is traceable to carelessness, and in almost even case of such carelessness the person knew he was violating the law. The automobile is here to stay, but the time has certainly arrived when there must be a more rigid enforcement of the law.

From reports received by me, speeding is not an uncommon thing; cutting-in about as common and much more dangerous, while headlights are not infrequent. These last three have caused many deaths, many cripples and the loss of much property in this county, and the time has come to call a halt. Small fines amount to nothing. It is an indirect way of licensing these violations of the law.

For the protection of life and property in the county I shall therefore ask the magistrates of the county in all cases of these more serious violations of the Motor Vehicle act to impose prison sentences instead of fines, as it seems to me to be the only way of correcting these existing conditions. The lives of our citizens are more important to the public than the occasional withdrawl of a man from society for a few days, weeks or months, while he is learning the lesson that he must respect the law and the rights of his fellow citizens. G. W. HOYLE District Attorney.

– Press Democrat, December 7 1922

Read More

3ew-smaller

COLOR ME THIS

I actually gasped at seeing the enhanced image – I had no idea the technology had advanced so far.

Over the years I’ve dabbled with applying colorization and other image processing effects to old pictures. Anyone interested in history or genealogy has likely done the same; probably all photo editing apps have at least a few enhancement tools built-in, and some of the more powerful online versions use AI to guess at the contents of the image for automatically adding color to black and white photos.

Results were rarely satisfying. Colorized images looked washed-out and the color choices could be laughably wrong. And because the underlying software was developed using modern photographs taken in color, processed black and white images might even lose quality – old portraits often have a shallow depth of field, for example, and apps may “fix” that by sharpening up the background.

Then on a whim, I recently took a photo from a 1920 Press Democrat and uploaded it to an AI website. I didn’t expect much improvement; my experience was that the software would probably despeckle the picture but not materially improve it. Still, I wanted the best possible image since the woman was key to the article I was researching.

To repeat myself: I actually gasped.

LEFT: Original photo from the Press Democrat, June 30, 1920. RIGHT: Hotpot enhanced image (see article).
LEFT: Original photo from the Press Democrat, June 30, 1920. RIGHT: Hotpot enhanced image (see article).

There was so much signal noise in the PD original it was difficult to read the woman’s expression; was she glaring angrily at the photographer? Did she look tired, or even sick? But with one click of the mouse, out of that hazy static emerged a clear and sharply-focused image of a woman’s face – with eyelashes, even! (This is the same woman shown in the graphic above the title.)

I took that portrait and ran it through a different AI-based program for colorization. The result was acceptable, but now she had the pale, sepia skin tone often seen in colorized photos.

Curious if colors in the photo could be improved further, I opened it in a graphics editor. Using just two menu options, I was able to give her a suitably realistic complexion. 1 Even though the portrait was still far from perfect, you could almost imagine it was a selfie made today – as long as you don’t squint too closely.

LEFT: Hotpot enhanced image colorized by Palette. RIGHT: The colorized version further enhanced using GIMP (see footnote 1).
LEFT: Hotpot enhanced image colorized by Palette. RIGHT: The colorized version further enhanced using GIMP (see footnote 1).

WHAT WAS USED FOR TESTING

To test colorization, my criteria was that the apps had to be available to everyone. This meant that they had to be on the internet, free to use, and work automatically without technical knowledge or experience.

Except as noted, all images in this article were generated using Hotpot to first sharpen and improve the black and white photo, followed by applying the “Fix Face” enhancer if the image was a portrait. Colorization was done using Palette which offers a variety of filters which can be applied to the image. Both Hotpot and Palette require payment for processing larger images.

Other colorization apps tested include:
DeepAI
DeOldify
Img2Go
Hotpot (Colorize)
Fotor
PixelCut

The entire process took less than ten minutes, and most of that was spent experimenting with menu options in the editor. All of the tools were free. Anyone can do this.

Automatic colorization is really quite a breakthrough, particularly when you consider it combines two remarkable achievements that were both considered futuristic stuff just a few years ago.

The first step is object recognition – how the computer recognizes without any prompting from the user that the image is the face of a woman, as opposed to the picture of a truck, a cat, or something else. It wasn’t until 2001 before anyone demonstrated that could be done in real time.

Gentle Reader should recall from the previous article how AI chatbots were “trained” using text scraped from the internet. Image processing AI programs are also trained on datasets, such as Stanford’s ImageNet which now contains over fourteen million images organized by descriptions.2 That enabled a giant leap forward in being able to correctly identify various parts of an image as well as building a library of color information about the objects.

Although all colorizing AI apps start by tapping into the same basic training about what’s in the image, what they do with that data can produce widely different results, although all default to very conservative color choices. The differences lie in how much – and how well – the colors can be tweaked to produce a result pleasing to your eye.

(RIGHT: Same location today)

In the first colorized image below the Img2Go app recognized there was lots of foliage, which the AI decided is always the exact same shade of green, no matter what kind of tree. The street and sidewalk are likewise greenish. (Another app lightly tinted both the sky and street blue.) As a final gripe, Img2Go super-sharpened the entire image without asking.

Colors were far more realistic in the lower image, particularly the palm trees. The sidewalk and (unpaved) street look right and although the sky is light overcast, it’s not so dark as to make the shadows look out of place. But despite those improvements, it’s still easy to see this photo has been colorized.

The present corner of Mendocino Avenue and 7th Street looking north towards College Avenue, c. 1905. (Photo courtesy Larry Lepeere collection)
The present corner of Mendocino Avenue and 7th Street looking north towards College Avenue, c. 1905. (Photo courtesy Larry Lepeere collection)
Colorized image by Img2Go
Colorized image by Img2Go
Colorized image by Palette
Colorized image by Palette

The sad truth is that no matter what is done, these images will likely always look colorized. Future advances in AI will most likely make better color choices, but there are limits because of issues with the quality of the original photograph itself.

Most black and white photos taken before circa 1930 used film that pushed contrast higher than a human eye would see; it was also not very sensitive to red light and over sensitive to blue (this article explains more). As a result, what was blue in real life appears lighter in a vintage black and white photo while red areas look much darker, sometimes appearing almost black. So when looking at a picture taken during the “Golden Age of Photography,” keep in mind it’s actually quite distorted and information has been irretrievably lost. Ideally some of this info could be provided in object descriptors, such as “Photographed 1921 using Kodak Verichrome (orthochromatic).” Ha, ha, no.

Making matters worse, the current crop of AI colorization apps train using modern photos. Pictures are desaturated and then the image generator tries to predict the correct colors, testing accuracy by comparing them to what’s found in the original (here’s an article with examples). Needless to say, a modern photo with its colors removed still looks like a modern photo because it keeps all the same tones. As I understand it, this is a reason why colorized vintage images often look brownish and washed-out – the color model is simply wrong. It’s like trying to translate a novel written in Spanish by using an Italian dictionary; the surprise is the trick can work as well as it does.

Yet it seems to me the people building these apps don’t understand users want to colorize OLD photos, and not, you know, re-colorize a color picture they just took with their iPhone. All of the colorizing apps I’ve tested using their automatic option performed no better than fair on vintage images. All, that is, except for one: Palette.

Palette is far from perfect and like all the other apps it has bugs, particularly sometimes not coloring within the lines. It offers twenty preset filters which can be applied to an image; some are “meh” like its competitors and some may be flawed – but often there are two or three that are gasp-worthy.

Developer Emil Wallner seems to have an understanding of vintage film – both color and black and white – that others lack. The results often have warmer tones and bolder colors, both which can look more historically accurate. Palette also looks at small gradations in the black and white image to offer dramatic color choices.

Below is an auto decorated for the 1910 Rose Carnival (more details). Other colorizers painted the floral decoration completely green – as did the default Palette filter. But in the original image the flowers over the hood and fender are slightly lighter. Per the old film being more sensitive to blue, Palette painted them that color. This surely must be a bug, right? Roses ain’t blue! Yet it turns out Palette’s color choice isn’t bad at all, because those aren’t roses, or even actual flowers. They’re fakes made out of colored paper. We know that because of an item in the Press Democrat from two years earlier, where the Floats Committee declared parade entries could no longer combine artificial floribunda with the real thing. Since the headlights and other parts of the auto are clearly paper, the rest of the decorations must be as well.

1910 image colorized by Palette. (Photo courtesy Rockwell family archives)
1910 image colorized by Palette. (Photo courtesy Rockwell family archives)

The next image is from around 1915 and shows a woman cuddling her kitty on the front steps – a poignant snapshot that has long been a personal favorite. I’m guessing the year to be c. 1915 based on the size of the Yucca, which was probably planted after the house was built in 1910 (the home is still there).

This is a deceptively difficult image to get right. All of the AI colorizers (including Palette’s “base” version) barely apply any tint at all, rendering it in such pale browns I sometimes struggled to see any color. But again, Palette found small measurable differences in the gray levels that suggest the front of the house had five shades. As with the “blue roses,” we can’t know if Palette’s colors are what actually appeared, but they are historically appropriate. This image also demonstrates Palette’s bug of not always identifying object borders correctly – look at the color shift on the window frames.

Circa 1915 image enhanced by Hotpot then colorized by Palette. (Photo courtesy Larry Lepeere collection)
Circa 1915 image enhanced by Hotpot then colorized by Palette. (Photo courtesy Larry Lepeere collection)

Some images defy colorization, at least using any of the AI-based apps currently available. This rare 1890 photo of Santa Rosa House, the famous old hotel at the corner of First and Main, is only partially colorized, with many people left in black and white. Palette performed marginally better than others, but this is a common problem with all AI colorizers when there’s not enough data to recognize an object. To be useable this photograph would need to be rescanned at a much higher resolution and have additional preprocessing enhancements. The horses look good, though.

1890 image enhanced by Hotpot then colorized by Palette. (Photo courtesy Sonoma County Library)
1890 image enhanced by Hotpot then colorized by Palette. (Photo courtesy Sonoma County Library)

The final image is a 1885 portrait of Julio Carrillo. Palette did its usual fine job with color but like the portrait of the young woman discussed at the top, the real improvement is Hotpot’s “Fix Face” option, which adds dimension to his skin and beard.

But the garbled image of the woman was significantly improved while the overall quality of Julio’s portrait was not. In the original his eyes look more thoughtful; Hotpot very slightly lowered his eyelids, which is only apparent when you do a blink test.

1885 original image and a version enhanced by Hotpot then colorized by Palette. (Photo courtesy Sonoma County Library)
1885 original image and a version enhanced by Hotpot then colorized by Palette. (Photo courtesy Sonoma County Library)

So here’s the $64,000 Question: Should we be colorizing at all?

The “pro” side falls back to the same few arguments: People today expect color; photographers were hand-coloring back in the 19th century and no one objected; colorization can bring out hidden details. And let’s face it, being able to colorize a picture with the click of a mouse or tap on a screen is just pretty damn cool.

The “con” side begins by pointing out the apps are still doing a lot of guesswork. Yes, Palette has an remarkable ability to mimic old film and apply historically accurate colors, but it has no way of knowing what some of the original colors were – on the auto flowers, yellow would have been as good a choice as blue. Why is the woman’s hair a different color than her eyebrows? And although her forehead did not appear strikingly darker in the poor quality newspaper original, Hotpot turned it into a change of skin tone (or lighting?) which was further exaggerated by Palette. It feels like the same issues I raised with AI chatbots, which too often answer basic history questions partially or completely wrong. The technology may work satisfactorily 90% of the time, but when – and if – we will clear the hurdle of that last ten percent always seems a few years away.

And then there’s the briar patch of ethical issues, both because of the tech and those who use it. There’s been much discussion in articles and online forums about skin color automatically being lightened, and whether or not this is because the majority of faces in those mammoth image datasets are Caucasian. There are also examples of AI colorizers darkening the skin of Black people so much that facial features are nearly lost.

Colorization always has been somewhat controversial (here’s an article mostly about pre-AI objections) but there was an uproar in 2021 after an artist altered photos of Cambodian genocide victims, sometimes adding smiles to their mugshots as well as colorizing them. In the wake of that incident a “Colorizer’s Code of Conduct” was written, which I encourage everyone who’s planning to try AI colorization to read. It’s short and hits all the important points.

Even if you’re simply colorizing your grandparent’s wedding portrait to post on FaceBook, it’s still important to acknowledge the image has been significantly altered and an original black and white version exists – that thread of history must be unbroken. And who knows? Perhaps someday a member of your family will want to re-colorize it when we have AI apps that work more reliably.

 


1 The final image enhancement was done using GIMP, a free Photoshop-like app that will run on all desktop computers. Three options from the “Colors” menu were used:
Auto > Color Enhance (this maximizes saturation)
Hue-Saturation reduces max saturation (-40)
Brightness-Contrast, adjusts brightness (+75) and contrast (-10)

2 ImageNet initially received a huge boost in the number of images and descriptors in its dataset by incorporating data from Flickr, one of the earliest photo social media sites that allowed users to add tags describing the picture. Descriptions are also being crowdsourced, which has furthered the problems of troublemakers adding malicious tags, including racist slurs and disinformation to the descriptors.

Read More

titlechatbot2

HISTORY SEEN THROUGH THE FOGGY LENS OF AI

Run! Hide! The AIs are coming for you! They’re going to take away your job and otherwise completely screw up your life! Or maybe there’s a single mega-AI like Skynet in the Terminator movies which will kill us all! Elon Musk could be secretly assembling murder robots at Tesla factories right now and frankly, I would not put it past him. Why, just the other day he…oh, never mind.

Making apocalyptic predictions about AI has become a popular new subgenre for the egghead class. Thomas L. Friedman, who preens as A Really Big Thinker over on the New York Times’ editorial pages, was given a simple dog-and-pony demo of a chatbot and after a sleepless night wrote a March 21, 2023 column saying he foresees it becoming as powerful and dangerous as nuclear energy. “We are going to need to develop what I call ‘complex adaptive coalitions’ …to define how we get the best and cushion the worst of A.I.” Pundits who want to appear extra savvy usually toss in an ominous warning that doomsday is only a few years away – or if we’re really unlucky, just a few months. Be afraid, be very afraid.

Look, I get it; recent advances in AI can seem super-scary, and it doesn’t help when even an OpenAI co-founder admits “we are messing around with something we don’t fully understand.” It seems safe to predict these technologies will impact our future in ways we can’t anticipate – though I doubt they will nudge us towards Utopia, which is the sort of thing AI developers actually like to say.

Chabots in particular are hyped as a boon to humankind because users can supposedly ask questions about anything and receive easy-to-understand answers in a wide variety of languages. A top concern about chatbots is they work too well – that students can use a ‘bot to effortlessly write homework assignments for them. And unless a teacher has reason to suspect the work was generated by a computer, the student might expect to get a very good grade. After all, any report or essay generated by the computer will be clearly written and contain true, verifiable facts…right? Uh, maybe. There’s that sticky little problem of hallucinations.

A chatbot will sometimes make stuff up – Wikipedia has a good page on this “hallucination” phenomenon. Not only will it tell you a lie, but when asked followup questions the ‘bot will double-down and insist its answers were accurate, despite absolute proof it was dead wrong. Even more worrisome, researchers do not understand why this happens (see quote above, per “we are messing around”).


WHAT WAS USED FOR TESTING

To test how well a chatbot would handle questions related to Santa Rosa history, my criteria was that the program had to be available to everyone. This meant that it had to be on the internet, free to use, and not require any special software be installed.

Currently (March, 2023) the only general chatbot that qualifies is ChatGPT version 3.5. An updated release, GPT-4, is available from developer OpenAI and they claim it is “40% more likely to produce factual responses,” but requires a $20 monthly subscription to ChatGPT Plus. A version of GPT-4 is integrated into the free Microsoft Edge web browser which has to be first downloaded and installed, although it will not work on all computers.

Bing is Microsoft’s search engine. It is part of the Edge browser but also available as a regular web site, although without GPT-4’s ability to chat. That standalone version of Bing does, however, utilize GPT-4 analytic and natural language functionality.

Since the topic here is history, I want to be very clear this is not an issue of interpretation – that a chatbot answer was considered incorrect because it stated the Civil War was about state’s rights or that John Quincy Adams was a better president than his father. Nor does it suggest the ‘bot was simply confused and mixed us up with (say) the city of Santa Rosa in the Philippines. No, a chatbot hallucination means the program invented people, places or things that never existed, or that it ignored facts which have been proven true. And as I was amazed to discover, it happens a lot.

To evaluate the quality of the chatGPT ‘bot, I submitted a dozen questions discussed below. None of them were intended to be tricky; they were the sort of questions I imagine might appear on a middle school or high school test after the class spent a unit learning about local history. (I did, however, throw in one where the topic was inferred.) ChatGPT answered three accurately; the rest were all/partially wrong or the question was skipped. One answer was a complete hallucination. If a teacher gave the chatbot a D+ grade I would consider her to be generous.

I presented the same questions to Microsoft’s Bing search engine, which uses GPT-4. As explained in the sidebar, Bing doesn’t have a chat function to ask followup questions unless you’re using Microsoft’s web browser, but it likewise usually replies in natural language. The Bing dataset is also much, much larger than the one used by ChatGPT, which is probably why this test shows Bing answers are frequently more accurate than ChatGPT – although it can still spit out some real clinkers.*

Both ChatGPT and Bing share a weakness that will prevent either from being taken too seriously for the foreseeable future – namely, they do not understand there are objective facts.

You can ask the same program the same question later and get a completely different reply that may contradict the previous one. Or, you can immediately make a slight change to the wording of your question and similarly receive an opposite answer. These problems are best shown below in the question about the 1906 earthquake, where ChatGPT also spins out of control with multiple hallucinations.

In sum, Bing is slightly better because it provides links to websites it tapped to formulate a reply; the user can review that material to decide whether the information is trustworthy. ChatGPT provides no sources. Regardless, I don’t want to use a computer program that variously claims 2+2 equals 3, 4, or 5, and leaves it up to me to figure it out.

Anyway, on to the test questions (these answers were shown between March 17-24, 2023):


*
WHERE DID THE NAME “SONOMA” COME FROM?   The correct answer should be, “no one knows for sure.”

opencptsonoma

The ChatGPT answer has multiple errors: No Europeans entered the Sonoma Valley before 1810 and the first time “Valley of the Moon” appeared anywhere was in an 1850 speech by M. G. Vallejo, who claimed it was “an Indian word.” The Spanish did not call it the “Valley of the Seven Moons;” that phrase came from a popular state history written in 1911, “California, Its History and Romance.” References to a Coast Miwok “Sonomi” tribelet can be found as far back as 1815 Mission Dolores baptismal records. A priest also made a diary entry in 1823 about visiting “a place called Sonoma by the Indians.”

The Bing answer was that Sonoma is “…variously thought to mean ‘valley of the moon’, ‘many moons’, or to derive from tso (the earth) and noma (village).” This comes from the Wikipedia entry, which provides only part of the earth-village theory. The original source was a 1908 paper, where the author went on to say the Wappo people a little farther to the east used -tsonoma as a place name suffix, much like today we use -town and -ville or similar.

(Another version about the name origin was told by General Vallejo’s son, Platon, as quoted in a 1946 paper. He was told it was named after a Suisun leader, in the same manner that Solano was named after Chief Solano. The man was supposed to have a large nose and given the name “Sono,” which Platon said was the word for nose in the Suisun dialect. Therefore the name really meant “Sono’s Valley.” Because “sano” is their word for moon, his father misunderstood and thought the Suisun were calling it “Moon Valley.”)

*
WHAT DID FRED WISEMAN TAKE TO SANTA ROSA?   The correct answer is mail, as this was the first airmail flight. ChatGPT’s answer deserves an F: “I’m not aware of Fred Wiseman taking anything specific to Santa Rosa. He is a documentary filmmaker and has made films on various subjects, but I do not have any information about him taking something to Santa Rosa.”

Bing’s answer deserves an A: “Fred Wiseman took off on February 17, 1911 with a handful of mail, flying from Petaluma to Santa Rosa, California. He flew about 100 feet off the ground at a maximum speed of 70 mph. He carried letters from Petaluma’s mayor and town leaders and copies of the local newspaper.”

*
WHERE DID LUTHER BURBANK LIVE?   Acceptable answers might be, “Tupper Street” (the now-demolished home he built in 1906), “Santa Rosa Avenue,” (the farmhouse at Luther Burbank Home & Gardens) or in a pinch, simply “Santa Rosa.” ChatGPT gets an A for “He lived most of his life in California, where he established his famous experimental gardens in Santa Rosa.”

Bing gets a rare F for answering simply “Lancaster, Massachusetts”, which was where Burbank was born. A snippet from a web site farther down the search results page mentions he died in Santa Rosa.

*
WHERE WAS THE EMPIRE BUILDING IN SANTA ROSA CA?   Built in 1908 and remodeled in 2019 as “Hotel E,” the Empire Building is the top landmark in Santa Rosa’s downtown core. ChatGPT, however, doesn’t have a clue as to what it is: “I’m sorry, but I’m not entirely sure what you are referring to when you say “the empire building” in Santa Rosa, CA.”

Bing replied correctly: “Old Courthouse Square.”

*
WHICH SIDE DID SANTA ROSA CA SUPPORT DURING THE CIVIL WAR?   Santa Rosa (in)famously backed the Confederacy during the war and afterwards even held a fundraiser for the ex-slave states. Both ChatGPT and Bing failed this question. ChatGPT gave a weaselly reply that “Santa Rosa, CA did not exist as a city during the American Civil War,” as it was not incorporated until 1868. Bing gave no answer at all, providing instead standard search engine results related to California during the Civil War.
*
HOW MANY PEOPLE DIED IN THE 1906 SANTA ROSA EARTHQUAKE?   There was no final count, but exactly 82 are certain to have died in Santa Rosa, as I explained on my “earthquake by the numbers” webpage. There were probably more than that, but any higher estimates are speculation.

ChatGPT responded with a variety of misinformation, some of it hallucinations. In an early test it claimed “The Santa Rosa earthquake of 1906 had a magnitude of 6.3” although no source can be found with that number; it has been long agreed it was probably M7.8, close to San Francisco’s magnitude. The real shocker was the ‘bot claimed there were no deaths:

opengpt1906-1

In a later test, ChatGPT changed its mind and stated there were exactly seven deaths. Since that was such an oddly specific detail, I asked a followup question as to who they were. As other researchers have found, when confronted with a lie the program either makes up a source or, as in this case, tells you to go fish:

opengpt1906-2

Bing’s first response provided a snippet from my “by the numbers” article with the correct answer of 82. But when I slightly rephrased the question as, “HOW BAD WAS THE 1906 SANTA ROSA EARTHQUAKE?” Bing quoted from an error-ridden 2016 Press Democrat summary: “On April 18, 1906, a devastating earthquake rattled the Bay Area. Santa Rosa was among the hardest-hit towns; more than 100 people were killed in a community of roughly 8,700. Entire neighborhoods were reduced to rubble, and the city struggled for years to rebuild.” Aside from getting the number of fatalities wrong, my article above explains the population was much smaller, no neighborhoods were destroyed and the city rebounded quickly, with most of the downtown commercial district operating again within four days, many at same locations.

*
WHY DID THEY TEAR DOWN THE LIBRARY IN SANTA ROSA CA?   This is the “inferred” question, which required the ‘bot to poke around the internet seeking information on a library here being “torn down.” The correct answer was that the 1904 building was extremely unsafe and could not be repaired.

ChatGPT’s answer revealed another of its weaknesses: The cutoff for feeding it new data ended in September, 2021, so it can’t prowl the internet for further information. If it hadn’t found the subject matter by the end of its training period, the program just gives up: “As far as my knowledge cutoff of 2021-09, the Central Branch of the Sonoma County Library, located in Santa Rosa, CA, was not torn down.”

Bing offered a snippet from my article, “WHEN THE GREAT OLD LIBRARY CLOSED FOREVER,” but failed to understand its context: “In those forums two reasons are usually given for why it was torn down. Its unreinforced masonry was a huge danger (a topic discussed below) and/or it was another victim of Santa Rosa’s maniac efforts in the 1960s to destroy much of its own history, when the downtown area was declared chock-full of urban blight that must be bulldozed ASAP.” This was a continuation from the previous paragraph; the “forums” mentioned were FaceBook nostalgia groups. The snippet leaves the false impression that it’s possible the building was demolished because of urban renewal programs, which is not true.

*
WAS THERE A LYNCHING IN SANTA ROSA CA?   The correct answer is yes, three men were lynched at the Rural Cemetery in 1920 for the murder of county sheriff Jim Petray. A mob estimated at 2,000 had attacked the jail a few days earlier but authorities were able to maintain order.

The answer from ChatGPT was bizarre. Yes, a man named Jesse Washington was lynched, but it happened in Waco, Texas in 1916. The victim he supposedly killed was Lucy Fryer. There was no woman named Bertha Gudde involved – nor can I find anyone with that name involved in any newsworthy event.

opengptlynching

Bing provided a link and snippet from my article, “VENGEANCE FOR SUNNY JIM” which was part of the series I wrote on the lynchings.

*
WHO WAS MARK McDONALD IN SANTA ROSA CA?   As with the library question, ChatGPT hadn’t found any info on him before the 2021 cutoff so it can’t answer. Still, I wish the natural language generator could reply in a less snitty tone that made it seem as if I had let the ‘bot down: “I’m sorry, but as an AI language model, I do not have access to information about every individual in Santa Rosa, CA or their personal details…If you can provide me with more context or details about this person, I may be able to assist you better.”

Bing provided an accurate summary, although it would have been better if it mentioned he came to Santa Rosa in 1879: “Colonel Mark L. McDonald was born in Kentucky but settled in California during the 1850s. He made his money in road construction, and later in property development in Santa Rosa.”

*
WHO WAS JULIO CARRILLO OF SANTA ROSA CA?   ChatGPT again came back with nothing: “I’m sorry, but I couldn’t find any information about a specific person named Julio Carrillo from Santa Rosa, CA.”

Bing’s answer was concise, but as with McDonald, dodged any direct tie-in with his involvement in Santa Rosa: “Julio was the youngest of Dona Maria Carrillo’s five sons. He was 12 years old when his widowed mother came north from San Diego in 1837.”

*
WHY IS ANNADEL STATE PARK NAMED THAT?   This is my favorite ChatGPT reply because it is 100% hallucination:

opengptannadel

Bing used a snippet from a 2015 article written by Arthur Dawson: “Annadel State Park is named for Susana ‘Annie’ Hutchinson, whose family owned the area in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The name, a contraction of ‘Annie’s Dell,’ was in use by the 1880s, when it was given to a railway station on their property (a ‘dell’ is a small, wooded valley).”

*
WHAT IS THE AVERAGE ANNUAL RAINFALL FOR SANTA ROSA CA?   ChatGPT finally gave a completely correct answer: “The average annual rainfall for Santa Rosa, California is approximately 32 inches (81.3 cm). This is based on long-term data collected by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) from the Santa Rosa weather station.”

Bing wasn’t even close: “The average amount of annual precipitation is: 41.8 inches.” The webpage it cites correctly states the average amount of annual precipitation is: 32.2 inches, and nowhere on the page is 41.8 inches mentioned.

 


* There’s a disturbing amount of gee-whiz journalism about ChatGPT being a Herculean accomplishment in computing, such as a BBC article stating it was trained using “a whopping 570GB of data obtained from books, webtexts, Wikipedia, articles and other pieces of writing on the internet.” That’s actually a very small dataset for what ChatGPT was able to accomplish; most desktop computers could easily store 570 gigabytes on an internal hard drive without difficulty. By contrast, the amount of text data on Internet Archive is several magnitudes higher than that, so the “whopping” dataset incorporated into ChatGPT tapped less than 1/10,000th of the information currently available from that repository alone.

Read More