• 2 Posts
  • 15 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 27th, 2023

help-circle
  • That’s why I specify that everything should be verified in a later comment. My point is that LLMs when properly guided are better than other automatic translation service, while hallucination can easily be avoided with proper prompting.

    Also worth mentioning that there’s massive difference in user generated translations already, some of it is well meaning while other, like in Israel’s case, isn’t.

    I translate a lot of stuff for my work, and I don’t have any problems when I instruct it properly. I’m also there to verify. I don’t have to deal with hallucinations ever, mostly just changing a word or two because I don’t like how it sounds (it uses overly complex words at times).

    This is more about certain users being shit and either not checking their work or doing work they have no place doing. They would exist no matter what they use, it’s not the tools fault.

    Tbh, I work in research and we would never use Wikipedia for anything. We can’t quote it and anytime I find a good tidbit on it and try and find the source, I usually get dead link or just something altogether false which doesn’t represent what the user wrote. Probably highly dependent on the subject though but the sourcing isn’t very rigorous.

    Bless them though, it’s an amazing site and they are still doing a stellar job considering how big it is.






  • All you have to do is ask for direct translation and it does it fine. This is plain incompetence.

    That being said, I’ve noticed there are wild difference between articles depending on the language. Mostly, it will be added content in the home language (so the article in French about a French city will have much more info) but sometimes, especially when it comes to Hebrew and Israel, you will get different conflicting information.

    They should have implemented checks for this a long time ago.








  • I fully believe AI will be able to replace 50% or more of desk jobs in the near future. It’s definitely a complicated situation and you make good points.

    First and foremost, I think it’s imperative the barrier for entry for model training is as low as possible. Anything else basically gives a select few companies the ability to charge a huge subscription fee on all our goods and services.

    The data needed is pretty heavy as well, it’s not very pheasible to go off of donated or public domain data.

    I also think any job loss is virtually guaranteed and trying to save them is misguided as well as not really benefiting most of those affected.

    And yea, the big companies win either way but if it’s easier to use this new tech, we might not lose as hard. Disney for instance doesn’t have any competition but if a bunch of indie animation companies and groups start popping up, it levels the playing field a bit.



  • Thats basically my main point, Disney doesn’t need the data, Getty either. AI isn’t going away and the jobs will be lost no matter what.

    Putting a price tag in the high millions for any kind of generative model only benefits the big players.

    I feel for the artists. It was already a very competitive domain that didn’t really pay well and it’s now much worse but if they aren’t a household name, they aren’t getting a dime out of any new laws.

    I’m not ready to give the economy to Microsoft, Google, Getty and Adobe so GRRM can get a fat payday.