With a few lifeboats still available, too many translators are both cursing and holding onto a sinking ship.

Numerous translators are actively discussing in various online venues the problems with AI translation and are saying that clients will come back to them when they discover the problems of AI. Although these discussions provide opportunities for bonding among colleagues, they serve no other identifiable purpose, and they certainly do nothing to impede the obvious headlong race into a world in which translation is viewed as a commodity by both translation brokers and their translation-consuming clients.

The underlying, persistent reality is that translation is a business.

The amount of money translation brokers have needed to pay translations they purchase for resale has been a constant profit-diluting annoyance to the LSB (language service broker) community. In response, brokers have employed numerous devices over the years to lower their translation purchase price. One device is the mandatory use of broker-specified CAT tools, with an accompanying discounting of rates that can be received by translators. Another is forcing translators to work on hamster-wheel online translation platforms in order to receive work.

But now the brokers on which most translators depend have a new way to lower (or almost eliminate) the cost of obtaining translations to sell, this being the elimination of professional translators from the translation process step.

And there is abundant evidence that they are succeeding at doing just that.

One reason for the brokers’ success is that the good-enough paradigm has been widely adopted and is working for a huge portion of the translation market.

Another reason is more serious for freelance translators and needs to be recognized by translators wishing to survive:

Brokers conduct themselves based on the correct understanding that very few translators from which they purchase translations can compete with them in acquiring direct clients themselves. Most translators don’t even know who their potential direct clients are. And, even if they do know, they generally don’t know who to approach at those clients or how to approach them. Many, for a variety of reasons, do not have the ability to access potential direct clients.

The adoption of AI by brokers succeeds largely by the monetization of their control of customers, combined with the inability of most translators to compete with brokers. It succeeds because good enough is good enough and, more critically, because most translators are trapped, with little ability to compete with brokers and no alternative income-earning path.

To survive by translating for earnings anywhere near what they previously could expect to earn, translators will need to acquire direct clients. For most translators, that will not be possible.

That is where broker-dependent freelance translators are, and it is essentially the end of the road for most translators wishing to pursue translation as a way to earn a living.

矮 in the world is this happening? All dwarfs are not created (or translated) equally.

In the field of astronomy, the term dwarf star has a long history. That history dates back far before the word police would raise their eyebrows and raise a fuss about dwarf being offensive.

That history has followed the term into the Japanese language, where the expression 矮星 has long been used and is still used to refer to dwarf stars, including on numerous pages of the website of the National Astronomical Observatory of Japan.

In the age of the word police, however, the demotion of Pluto to the status of dwarf planet presented an opportunity for the authorities (at least here in Japan) to make allow the politics of correctness to intrude into language. The result is that the term is treated differently between Japanese and English.

Whereas 星 is accepted for dwarf star in Japanese, 惑星 for dwarf planet is avoided, surely for fear that the word police would coming knocking on the door of offensive transgressors. The NAOJ website gives a nod to the dwarf planet use in English, but avoids mention of 惑星 in Japanese, preferring to use the safer English term dwarf planet in running Japanese text, rather than use the dreaded character.

One example, from a FAQ page of the NAOJ website:

太陽系のdwarf planetとは、「太陽の周りを回り」「十分大きな質量を持つために自己重力が固体としての力よりも勝る結果、重力平衡形状(ほぼ球状)を持ち」「その軌道近くから他の天体が排除されていない」「衛星でない」天体である。

[from https://www.nao.ac.jp/faq/a0508.html]

Another method used to avoid 矮 is to call these dwarf planets 惑星.

I guess the only thing that language realists can be thankful for is that the language revisionists have not banned 星 for dwarf star, but perhaps the day will come when we will see that character banned in dwarf stars as well. Time will tell.

Thoughts on stock photos and AI-generated photos

You often see company websites with photos of what are intended to look like groups of employees, sometimes sitting in a meeting room or standing around chatting. These are almost all stock photos, purchased for the purpose of decorating a company website with attractive photos of attractive people who have no connection with the company using the photo.

A typical stock photo of a group includes:

  • handsome males,
  • beautiful females, and
  • a woke makeup of genders, ethnicities, and ages.

Some people might look at the photo and believe that these are actually people who work at the company or are customers for the company’s products or services. Many will not. Is that an honest way to present the company? Perhaps some people would say no.

Now take an example of a company using a typical AI-generated photo depicting the same type of group, which includes:

  • handsome males,
  • beautiful females, and
  • a woke makeup of genders, ethnicities, and ages.

There are still people who would say this is dishonest, but there is an aspect of the photo that would disclose clearly to visitors to the website that what they are viewing is fake. One out of five of the people depicted will have the wrong number of fingers on one of their hands or have their left or right hand attached to the end of the wrong arm.

There you have it, honesty restored by embracing one of the strengths of AI, anatomical hallucination.

(On the occasions we might use AI for photos (we never use it for translation), we flag that fact by using a mouseover text that indicates the source.)