Isn't rule 27 outdated?

[Best_Change]

We used the services of a translation agency Alconost. This is what we got.

Out of the BestChange staff, I speak basic Dutch, but my level is not sufficient enough to distinguish the translation quality.

I will take the issue to the translation agency.

Please tell, if this the reason why our topic in Swedish was removed?

If we do not get a proper response from Alconost, and you want to help us out with our translations, feel free to DM.

Thank you!

P.S. We reached out to the agency with the question, and they said they would initiate an investigation, would ask the text to be proofread by another linquist and get the comments from the translator.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

What most translators do today is take the text and run it through a machine translator and then review what the machine translator does. Depending on their desire and competence or how busy they are at the time they can do it better or worse, but in the end I decided a long time ago that unless it is absolutely necessary, I am not going to pay for a translation.

[JiiBs]

Why you can't prove it? isn't native speaker know if the grammar off or use wrong words?

I am a native speaker and I am not able to prove it. It is written as if it had been done by a native speaker and considering the number of similar threads they have written, it is normal that they are translated with an automatic translator.

It’s good to know and say your a native speaker but still, don’t have a clear distinction on that which is done by a translator and that which is hand written or typed by a native speaker.
I might be new to this whole thing but my take is that, the rule actually applied when, it ain’t that good as it abuses the language for native speakers, leads to a lot of confusion and with the fact that, some words could differ in meaning based on the context they are being used.
These and many more could be what the rule 27 was create to avoid and with that been the case, the rule is subjective and could apply in obvious cases.
That means, it could be given a pass being that good, I think.

[joker_josue]

I don't understand... do you use a team of translators, or do you use machine translators?

They "used the services of a well-established translation agency". It could be the translation agency uses machine translation, which means they're basically scamming their customers. I recently read an article (in Dutch) in which translators complain their fees are pushed down by chatbot translations, and most of their jobs are degraded to checking machine translations.

They are complaining that their work is being undervalued, but it seems that even the translation agencies themselves are using automatic translation tools.

I believe that this translation work will largely be replaced by AI. But, in the end, whoever is really good in the area will make a lot of money, because good translations always need to be done by humans.

To effectively translate a text, it is not enough to know the meaning of the words and the meaning of the text. You need to know how natives think and speak in their daily lives.

It's true that for most cases, machine translation may be sufficient. But, for technical or specialized work, which requires high quality, humans must translate.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

It’s good to know and say your a native speaker but still, don’t have a clear distinction on that which is done by a translator and that which is hand written or typed by a native speaker.

In this case it was even worse, as it seemed that the translation at least in some cases was automatic and it seems that Best_Change hired a translator, which means that the barrier between machine translation/human translation is becoming more and more blurred.

I don't understand... do you use a team of translators, or do you use machine translators?

They "used the services of a well-established translation agency". It could be the translation agency uses machine translation, which means they're basically scamming their customers. I recently read an article (in Dutch) in which translators complain their fees are pushed down by chatbot translations, and most of their jobs are degraded to checking machine translations.

They are complaining that their work is being undervalued, but it seems that even the translation agencies themselves are using automatic translation tools.

I believe that this translation work will largely be replaced by AI.

Nowadays, hiring an agency to translate would not be scam if they check what the automatic translation does well, but either due to human error, incompetence or because they are too busy, there may be errors when checking and things may happen that do not sound like natural language, as in this case.

And yes, AI will eventually replace translators. Deepl.com was very good, better than google translators, but AI is a step further.

[Porfirii]

In the AoBT we are committed to translate all texts by hand. A few of our translators are willing to proofread a text translated by a machine instead, for a cheaper price, if the client prefers, but manual translation is the only one that guarantees that it will sound completely natural.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

In the AoBT we are committed to translate all texts by hand. A few of our translators are willing to proofread a text translated by a machine instead, for a cheaper price, if the client prefers, but manual translation is the only one that guarantees that it will sound completely natural.

I think there is a lot of merit in what you all are doing in that Alliance, my friend Porfirii, but I also think you are fighting a giant that is getting bigger and bigger.

For the time being Best_Change could take note and hire people from the Alliance to do these translations.

[dkbit98]

it is not clear to us was the suspicious in using machine translation was the reason for our Dutch topic to be taken off.  Could anyone please advise?

I don't understand Dutch language but I trust user who reported it, and I would do the same if automated translation was posted in our local board.
You should fire ''translator'' you hired and find someone who can actually speak local languages, maybe active trusted members from local boards.

[Porfirii]

In the AoBT we are committed to translate all texts by hand. A few of our translators are willing to proofread a text translated by a machine instead, for a cheaper price, if the client prefers, but manual translation is the only one that guarantees that it will sound completely natural.

I think there is a lot of merit in what you all are doing in that Alliance, my friend Porfirii, but I also think you are fighting a giant that is getting bigger and bigger.

For the time being Best_Change could take note and hire people from the Alliance to do these translations.

I agree with you that sooner or later machine translation will make translators obsolete, but not yet. We have discussed in the past about these "piscinas de minado" (mining swimming pools) and other hallucinations of AI.

Someone tell me if you can prove that Best_Change has used an automatic translator for the posts on the Spanish board, because I can't.

¡Olvídate de buscar intercambiadores (exchangers)! ¡Utiliza BestChange!

It is also the case of "exchange(r)s", which we have also discussed in the past about what the best option might be (should we translate them as the traditional "casa de cambio"? does "servicio de canje" sound better? or maybe we'd adopt the anglicism/neologism "exchange(r)" instead?). Personally I find the literal "intercambiador" too generic, and it's definitely not the term I would use when talking about it to a friend.

The day will arrive when human intervention will not be necessary, I don't deny it, but machine translators are not yet ready for our constantly evolving crypto-slang. And I'm not even talking about transcreation, which would undoubtedly give rise to another debate:

Transcreation is a term coined from the words "translation" and "creation", and a concept used in the field of translation studies to describe the process of adapting a message from one language to another, while maintaining its intent, style, tone, and context.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Personally I find the literal "intercambiador" too generic, and it's definitely not the term I would use when talking about it to a friend.

Well, you, like me, see that as someone who speaks Spanish from Spain, but in South American Spanish (full of anglicisms) it might sound more natural.

The day will arrive when human intervention will not be necessary, I don't deny it, but machine translators are not yet ready for our constantly evolving crypto-slang.

It seems to me that you haven't tried translating with ChatGPT very much yourself (obviously because you translate yourself). A word of advice, if you are ever unclear how to translate a set phrase, ask ChatGPT.

[Porfirii]

Personally I find the literal "intercambiador" too generic, and it's definitely not the term I would use when talking about it to a friend.

Well, you, like me, see that as someone who speaks Spanish from Spain, but in South American Spanish (full of anglicisms) it might sound more natural.

I would use the word "Exchange" in Spanish. I think that this is the trend in Spain and LATAM, to call them by their original name instead of inventing something new.

The thing is that one should find the term that fits for both types of users (Spaniards and South Americans). In Spanish, unlike others, the official language is only one, ruled by the RAE for every Spanish-speaking country. The RAE doesn't cover all these new crypto terms, but what I mean is that formal texts should sound good for everyone regardless of nationality.

I concede that in this case Intercambiador isn't so bad, it's not like the example of the swimming pool.

The day will arrive when human intervention will not be necessary, I don't deny it, but machine translators are not yet ready for our constantly evolving crypto-slang.

It seems to me that you haven't tried translating with ChatGPT very much yourself (obviously because you translate yourself). A word of advice, if you are ever unclear how to translate a set phrase, ask ChatGPT.

I used ChatGPT a few months ago for legal work and it just doesn't work. It mixes articles of laws from different Spanish-speaking countries, invents jurisprudence... it is not good for fine work.

You're right, I haven't tried it for translations and maybe it has progressed a lot since the last time I read about the topic, but at that time it seemed that the problems of hallucinations, semantics, internal references etc. were intrinsic to the way these tools were built and that they wouldn't be fully solved until the AGI at least. And we're not there yet.

I still see two problems: 1) most lazy translators will use Google translate and tools like that, not the last version of the most advance LLM; and 2) even if they used the last version of ChatGPT, and >99% of the text was perfectly translated, the devil would still be in the details, and a few simple mistakes in key terms could ruin the image of the entire work if it wasn't properly proofread at least.

[Best_Change]

Dear everyone,

The agency has re-done the translation, and we have made a new post on the Local Dutch board. We hope it is fine now.

Thank you, everyone, for participating!

[Hispo]

Also, I would like to point out how ironic it is that in most of the cases when an outstanding member of the forum passed by the Spanish section and is obviously using translating tools in order for them to communicate with us, we rather welcome their effort to communicate with us and we do not focus on reporting the use of those tools there in the Spanish section. I believe Cyan was one who visited us once and admitted to use Google translator?

What I am trying to say here is that in general within the Spanish speaking community, we do not get bothered by foreigners trying to speak our language, even though they commit obvious mistakes and show some blatant grammar issues, we actually believe it is kind of endearing when people try to adopt our language. because of cases like those ones I find the rule to be kind of a written rule which is ignored (at least it is in the Spanish board), it is part of the culture of the Spanish speaking community and the fact we are relatively inactive when compared to other sections of the forum, we try to be as welcoming as possible to all already established members who feel curious enough to take a peek on us. 

The rule can stay if it is necessary, but I won't get enforced by many users I know.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

Also, I would like to point out how ironic it is that in most of the cases when an outstanding member of the forum passed by the Spanish section and is obviously using translating tools in order for them to communicate with us, we rather welcome their effort to communicate with us and we do not focus on reporting the use of those tools there in the Spanish section. I believe Cyan was one who visited us once and admitted to use Google translator?

<...>

The rule can stay if it is necessary, but I won't get enforced by many users I know.

I remember several people who have passed by and used the translator, putting the English version and the translated version to make it clear that they were translating it and not hiding. I remember 3 campaign managers (who came by when they saw themselves quoted by what we were talking about) and for example fillippone, who like many Italians has some idea of Spanish but has used the translator so he is understood properly.

[LoyceV]

Also, I would like to point out how ironic it is that in most of the cases when an outstanding member of the forum passed by the Spanish section and is obviously using translating tools in order for them to communicate with us, we rather welcome their effort to communicate with us and we do not focus on reporting the use of those tools there in the Spanish section.

Maybe there should be an exception to this rule: translating one unique text you wrote into one language to join a conversation on a local board isn't what causes spam. It becomes a problem if you post the same translated text on many different local boards.

This rule stops me from posting on the German board once in a while. When I post the 3 German words I know myself, the post is for sure less quality than a machine translation would produce.

[fillippone]

Also, I would like to point out how ironic it is that in most of the cases when an outstanding member of the forum passed by the Spanish section and is obviously using translating tools in order for them to communicate with us, we rather welcome their effort to communicate with us and we do not focus on reporting the use of those tools there in the Spanish section. I believe Cyan was one who visited us once and admitted to use Google translator?

<...>

The rule can stay if it is necessary, but I won't get enforced by many users I know.

I remember several people who have passed by and used the translator, putting the English version and the translated version to make it clear that they were translating it and not hiding. I remember 3 campaign managers (who came by when they saw themselves quoted by what we were talking about) and for example fillippone, who like many Italians has some idea of Spanish but has used the translator so he is understood properly.

Maybe there should be an exception to this rule: translating one unique text you wrote into one language to join a conversation on a local board isn't what causes spam. It's becomes a problem if you post the same translated text on many different local boards.

This rule stops me from posting on the German board once in a while. When I post the 3 German words I know myself, the post is for sure less quality than a machine translation would produce.

I confirm that I used automatic translation to post on Spanish and other local boards.
I always declared that I used this tool, of course, to translate my own thoughts into the local language and not to interrupt the stream of the thread with English.
I never used automatic translators to translate my posts “automatically” into several languages, as I have a dedicated thread for this (human-translated versions of my best posts).


I think that as long as the translated content is original and adheres to the flow of the discussion, it might be considered using automatic translators if the use is declared.

[Stablexcoin]

The rule still stands, anyone who violates the rule will bear the consequences. No rules yet have been outdated in the forum, because they have helped keep orderliness in the forum and make it easier for the moderators to do their job adequately. Imagine a discussion on a local board is accessible to everyone because of the access to enhanced AI tools.

No doubt AI has been improved rapidly, You barely can tell the difference when it comes to translation and voice overs. If you give the right prompt it will give the right result.

[Don Pedro Dinero]

The rule still stands, anyone who violates the rule will bear the consequences.

If you had read this thread, just the posts prior to yours, you would have realised that what you say is false, but I consider it mission impossible for people to read even the posts prior to yours on this forum.

No rules yet have been outdated in the forum, because they have helped keep orderliness in the forum and make it easier for the moderators to do their job adequately.

Outdated I don't know but the off topic rule does not apply to everyone equally, as we have discussed in this section.

Imagine a discussion on a local board is accessible to everyone because of the access to enhanced AI tools.

That would be great. More traffic for the local forums.

No doubt AI has been improved rapidly, You barely can tell the difference when it comes to translation and voice overs. If you give the right prompt it will give the right result.

I don't know if you realise that I based my argument in the OP on that.

[nakamura12]

Not completely sure, but I think the actual purpose of this rule is probably to stop people from other languages from participating in discussions or threads posted on another local board. For example, if I'm a German native speaker, I shouldn't be posting on the Spanish local board because that isn't for me. If I have something that I want to discuss, ask, or post, we have global boards for that.

There is a difference between a person using a translation tool to translate his posts into English and post them on a global board and a person translating their posts to post them on another local board other than their own. The word 'global' means it is for everyone, whereas a 'local' board is supposed to be used only by the native speakers of that board.

I could be wrong, but this is what my understanding is of that rule, and I don't think it is outdated based on this theory because a user should still not be allowed to use a translation tool to participate in a local board discussion where they are not a native.

That is also my understanding of that rule. That's the reason why I don't join discussions where I don't understand the language or speak the language so I'd rather use different board where I can speak or write like English since there's topic being discussed in different languages so it's better if I join in that discussion unless I can speak it or write that language. I have seen a forum member who isn't a native speaker of the language but was able to speak or write using the language so I don't mind about it. This rule means to stop people from using AI and it doesn't include those who speak the language like for example, I can speak Spanish but it isn't my native language.