all 7 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 16 points 1 year ago*

Though my sample size is small, these stories fit my thesis that the real AI jobs crisis is that the drumbeat, marketing, and pop culture of "powerful AI” encourages and permits management to replace or degrade jobs they might not otherwise have. More important than the technological change, perhaps, is the change in a social permission structure.

Agreed. If a company says “we’ve automated this job and it’s now done by AI,” they mean “we’ve decided to take advantage of media trends by dramatically lowering the quality and reliability of our processes, consistent with our policy of doing things as cheaply as our customers will tolerate.”

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The AI translations still suck big time. Yes I run whisper on my local stuff, but I shouldn't be able to tell that much from Crunchyroll. Like common at least review the subtitles... What the heck am I even paying for

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -30 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Genuinely, what the hell are you doing in this community? I've never read a more snide and condescending derision of an entire field of labor based on an entirely corporatist, anti-worker, grindset worldview on this forum to date. Following this line of thought across our society leads us to an absolute fucking dystopia, and somehow you've not only internalized it and self aggrandize about how you pulled yourself up to the next level of success by your bootstraps, you've went and tried to argue that asinine point in a community focused on strengthening the rights, powers, and well being of the common worker.

    Why are you here?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    To some extent I get what you're saying, people do need to evolve and things change but also while we have humans with jobs I also feel like they should be comfortable. Some of the things that you're listing as failings feel perfectly reasonable to me. Like having water or having a comfortable place to sleep if you need to be on location for a job. We're all going to have to evolve and see what work looks like as things change but that's not a reason in my opinion to price ourselves into unsustainable conditions or pay. Once that's the case then we clearly need some other way to make things work or unionize to protect each other.

  • source
  • parent
  • 29 comments in c/technology@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 26 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    What most people managing translations don't get is that they are essentially using the tools that translators use, but skipping the value adding step.

    I've been doing translation as a side gig for years. Lately I've been doing some translations for an NGO that deals with addiction management, of which I'm part.

    The materials have a lot of nuances, and need the translator to understand them, to properly convey the concepts.

    The usual process for translation is to feed the original to a machine language translation software, and then work with both versions side by side, in a translation management software, tools that make editing and proofing faster and easier by a human, to achieve the best result.

    Last time, someone in the organization, mono lingual, decided to do a handbook translation with ChatGPT, or something like that. They then gave the result to a colleague and me.

    The resulting translation was exactly what we expected.

    A problem was that some bilingual people were shown the results, and reported that the results were amazing, without realizing that they were commenting on the wow factor, not on the accuracy of the result, especially because they had not done a critical side by side comparison.

    My colleague and I did the editing work, were paid less, but the end result was the usual translation quality.

    The commissioning person at the org boasted that AI translation was great, obviating our work, to get their brownie points.

    TLDR: translation has used machine translation as a first step for a long time, with results edited and polished by humans. Ignorant decision makers are skipping that crucial step, getting sub-par results, oblivious to the fact.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I would consider what you do localization. Translations are 1 aspect of that role

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Not really our case. We do English->Spanish, where we try to achieve the most neutral Spanish, as there are many local variations. Think truck/lorry, for example. It's more translating expressions or phrases that don't convey the same concept. For example, "by the way" could be translated to "por el camino" which doesn't usually have the same usage.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    I believe this will pass. Sooner or later, the AI companies will have to stop losing money and adjust their pricing. And then it'll turn out that using AI for everything gets you worse results than humans, at the same cost. And that will be that. I hope I can hang on until then.

    such hope, i wish i had

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago

    It really sounds like a "Let's go to the Winchester, have a nice cold pint, and wait for this all to blow over" reaction.

    Things will be different. Maybe AI won't replace humans entirely in this role, but it's still going to be a major tool in the toolbox.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    I think the AI bubble is really close to poping. If they can't make a profit on it in the next 2 years (maybe sooner with how badly the economy is about to start doing) VC money will dry up and then they will have to up prices dramatically.

    There's a lot of factors I could get into but it seems like they are going to have to start pricing AI use at the very least cost soon.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 34 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    It‘s terrible and sad. Even more so because AI still gets things wrong all the time.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm a simultaneous interpreter, and it's a bloodbath out there. Partially because anyone who needs a translator or an interpreter by default is unable to verify the accuracy of the translation/interpretation - they can only tell if it's smooth, believable, and such. And, AIs are great at being believable even when they make shit up...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    I tested a few local models to see how complete and recent their training data is. I want to use it to see if company A at xyz address is the same as Company B at xyz.1 address. I asked them for recent events and found a lot of gaps. So I asked for the roster of the 1992 dream team. Very mixed results. Open AIs model got 11/12 players correct but absolutely insisted that Christian Laettner was not the 12th player. I went back and forth with it to see if I could get it to accept my knowledge as is. It wouldn’t. I’m terrified about what happens when these AI bots have the ability to update Wikipedia in order to make the facts match their incomplete training data.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I know someone who was a translator between two (less widely spoken) languages, and some specifics I recall from our conversations about work:

    • Sometimes the translations use many technical terms, and getting those wrong (trusting LLMs) is not an option. (This was for some patents IIRC)
    • Some terms simply do not exist in another language, and it could be up to the translator to invent a term to define and carry the information across. (This was for some government digital service, and the term was similar to "digital queue")
    • Tone and nuances are very difficult to translate. Phrasing can have implications and connotations. (Simplest example: "i am afraid" does not imply fear, it's an established politeness phrase) Neutral in one language could be viewed as hostile in another, too. (And with politicians being petty, could have consequences)

    None of those would be addressed with LLMs. Small training set for language (and language being similar to a few others) is an issue. Anything technical or non-existing would be prone to hallucinations. And tone is difficult enough to convey through text to begin with, let alone with LLM translation.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    LLM gets 95% of the translation done, but the 5% is likely every important and it takes longer to confirm it's correct than to do it from scratch anyway

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    How good is LLM training data for a language spoken by less than 10 million people? Keep in mind that most of those people are probably multilingual (i.e. categorizing which language is which by person is harder), and language itself is similar to its neighbors. And then, again, terms.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    I've had to translate a whole bunch of letters from English to Finnish for my grandparents, and doing it using a translator saves a ton of time as I don't have to actually produce the text, I can just read both sides afterwards and as long as every sentence matches in meaning, I can move to the next one.

    But I wouldn't trust it to actually be correct for the entire thing, because it never is, and if someone who doesn't understand one of the languages would do it they would never spot the mistakes either.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

    I wonder what % of all translations are things like patents, legal paper and movies and what are simple localizations. Even in the more complex cases you can pass the entire text through AI first and then just proof read it and correct the errors.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago

    My company thankfully still employs simultaneous interpreters for meetings and has one translator on staff. I think, at least in part, because of how bad translation tools can be from EN <> JA.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    I'd expect any translation requiring zero mistakes and translator's official responsibility wouldn't be hurt by this.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (7 children)

    The world would be soo easy if there was 1 lang. No more translations no more burning money water electricity

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I've always thought a BASIC international language would be great. I mean, there's already international sign language, and Arabic numerals are pretty universal. Doesn't need to be poetic, or intense. Just "Me want this, I need this" type of structure. Maybe a modified version of Latin, with all gender neutral variants.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments