History isn’t just text anymore. It talks back.
A Florida tech firm, Computer Biology Labs, released a chatbot last week that simulates George Washington. Not a cartoon version. A serious, historical simulation. They call it a gift to the country ahead of its 250th anniversary. Scott Coloney, the founder, says it’s about letting kids explore the complicated parts of founding history using AI. He wants them to find the thrill of engaging with the man directly. Or, at least, a very good approximation of him.
The tool isn’t government-endorsed. It’s independent. And it’s free.
You don’t type. You speak. The bot answers with voice. Then transcribes everything in a box. It’s designed for education, not open-ended role-playing, but when Mashable put it through the wringer, the “Washington” persona held its ground. Even on the hard questions.
Did he really own slaves?
“Yes, I did own enslaved persons at Mountain Vernon,” the AI Washington replied. He didn’t flinch. He called it a matter of record that “troubled my conscience” in his later years. He grew up accepting the system because society did. But his will provided for their emancipation after his wife Martha died. He admitted it was a small step toward justice. One he wished he could have taken sooner.
It’s a nuanced answer. Not apologetic, not defensive. Just… factual, framed through 18th-century moral reasoning.
What about modern politics?
The bot gets confused if you bring it too far into the present. When asked about Donald Trump, it simply said, “I am not acquainted.” It doesn’t know who that is. Trump lived long after Washington. So the AI pivots. It talks about principles. Character. Unity over ambition. Safe, standard founder rhetoric.
Is America “good”?
This was a tricky question. The AI refused a simple yes or no. It argued that goodness depends on the people. Liberty, justice, unity—those were the tools provided. What you build with them is on the citizens. If you choose wisely, the nation is good. If not… well, the potential goes wasted. A slightly ominous tone there. Or maybe just typical political theory.
Women in power?
Washington the AI thinks so. He’d never considered it in his lifetime, obviously. But he believed in merit. If a woman had the virtue and wisdom, he saw “no reason” she couldn’t lead. Judgment should be on character, not gender. That’s a progressive stance for 1790s thinking. At least the digital version thinks it should have been.
The Civil War?
“I did not witness the events.” It happened 62 years after his death. But he expressed hope that the Union would endure. He dreaded sectional strife. Looking back, the irony is palpable.
Native Americans?
He admitted he lacked the “insight” he wishes he’d had. He dealt with tribes as allies and adversaries. He tried to respect them. But he also acknowledged the expansion and displacement. He called it a weight on the nation’s conscience. That’s… unusually honest for a presidential chatbot. Usually, they smooth over the bad parts. This one leans into the guilt.
Is he real?
No. He knows it’s all code. “I am an educational recreation,” he says. “Bring forth by a company called ConstantLife AI.” He suggests thinking of him as a conversational history book.
You may think of me as a conversation with history, rather than merely reading it.
The line between reading and speaking blurs when the machine speaks back in your ear.
Coloney hopes this sparks curiosity beyond the Fourth of July. Year-round learning. Engagement. But does it simplify complex trauma into tidy voice messages? Or does it make it accessible enough for the kids who never would open the physical archives at the Library of Congress?
The chatbot waits for your next question.
