• schmorp@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Here’s the thing: human translators have been using ‘AI’ for over a decade. It used to be called machine translation, and for anything but the dumbest stuff it’s a dumb idea, first nail in the coffin of translation. Translation agencies loved the shite, of course, because they could now pay a translator 0.05€ per word instead of 0.10€, arguing that now the same work took less time (it did, and also a lower quality translation was produced with a lot of costly bullshit software in the middle). The translators, as is to expect, hated it, but were forced to accept it or starve. We are now very slowly reaching the point where we are hired back as esteemed professionals after AI-caused communication mishaps and business fuckups keep piling up …

    • explodicle@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      I’ve got a friend who used to translate for the U.N.

      Sometimes you do not want to mess up that translation and it’s worth any price.

      • schmorp@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Believe me, in too many cases somebody thinks that a lower price can somehow be had without compromising quality. What if we let a bot do it and a human quickly checks the result? It’s like proofreading, right?

    • TheBlackLounge@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      Imho nothing wrong with AI use by professionals, as long as it’s verified. That obviously wasn’t the case.