| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] > | Professional Translators Against Crowdsourcing and Other Unethical Business Practices Thread poster: paula arturo
|
|---|
Francisco de Azevedo (X)
Argentina
Local time: 15:12
French to Spanish
+ ...
| Not only for internal use, not only MT setup | Dec 21, 2009 |
Farkas,
I believe that your summary of the article posted above excludes some key points. You said:
FarkasAndras wrote:
IBMs platform is not really crowdsourcing: the article says it is used for internal communication (IBM has employees in dozens of countries) and the system learns from the corrections made by its users. So the idea is not having the employees revise the machine translation of a user manual, just machine translating employees emails sent to each other (and feeding the corrections back into the MT database). It is a bog standard MT setup.
Correct me if I am wrong, but a MT technology that evolves based on crowd feedback is not that bog standard to me. Moreover, you neglected to comment on the very inspiring words by IBMs spokesman, Ari Fishkind, in which he refers to the platform as a crowdsourcing idea:
The whole point is to continually refine the idioms and the syntax and the context by people who use the language every day [...] And that's part of this crowdsourcing idea where hopefully at the end of the day we are going to have a system that is not only intelligible but also fluent and fluid.
Interesting choice of words, is it not? Intelligibility and fluency are usually reserved to describe people's skills, not machines' or systems'. Sure, you could say: can we really trust his linguistic accuracy and knowledge? Probably not. But it is still an interesting choice of words.
Also, the author of the article clearly states that IBM is analyzing the possibility of marketing nFluent externally as a product/service:
IBM spokesman Ari Fishkind said there is no fixed date as to when it might be available externally. "It would be a reasonable assumption that there is a demand in the market for a translation tool that has very good security," he said.
Does anyone else read: abandon ship? BTW, this goes in the same line than the article I quoted before.
Kevin and Gilles,
We can all have our positions and opinions about whether or not crowdsourcing and MT are a real threat to us quality driven human translators, but in a rapidly price-decaying scenario, you can only hold on to the quality argument for so long. Other than that, what I think we should not do is underestimate this potential issue and its signs: that will only lead to a flawed strategy.
[Edited at 2009-12-21 14:05 GMT]
[Edited at 2009-12-21 14:06 GMT]
[Edited at 2009-12-21 14:40 GMT]
| | | | | Welcome to the machine #2 | Dec 21, 2009 |
Kevin Lossner wrote: Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote:
Kevin, I agree entirely... good translators are in real demand... simply, there aren't enough of them... but MT editing will have some role in the future, because MT will become better with time, and will be more "editable"... How old are you, Giovanni? I've been hearing stuff like that for more than 30 years and none of the predictions have even been close. In the same vein, I remember my second grade teacher telling me more than 40 years ago that the US would soon switch to the metric system. Outside of laboratories, I think she must have meant "soon" on a geological time scale. You're right of course that MT will get "better" by various scales of measurement. So what? With controlled language, some of that stuff is editable now, but most tech writers at my clients don't have the discipline to do controlled language in any useful way. They prefer to spell critical vocabulary five different ways in two pages and then throw in some synonyms and their variations just for fun. And do it in dialect once in a while just to keep me on my toes. If MT manages to put us out of business in our lifetimes, come to Berlin to drown your sorrows. We've got a great French wine shop (sorry, Giles) down the road. The bottle's on me. Better just means that the aforementioned househubbies and starving students will suffer a bit less or at leased be lulled into a sense of false security and let some really dangerous errors slip through. There will still be enough real translation for real translators with marketing savvy to stay busy if they wish to do so.
which one am I? The one in flames on the right? Probably...
I know people predicts stuff all the time and it never materialises, but I've seen a big progress in the developing of MT... we''ll see, but you don't have to convince me about its future usability (or non usability)... I know there is a long way to go and I will be probably be dead by then...
BTW, I'm 47... and I will definitely come and see you in Berlin... I haven't been for ages...
[Edited at 2009-12-21 14:57 GMT]
| | | | David Russi 
United States
Local time: 12:12
English to Spanish
+ ...
| Just because you don't know tou're being exploited, does not mean it ain't so... | Dec 21, 2009 |
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote:
People who take part in crowdsourcing projects do so on their own accord... nobody is forcing them to do it! Crowdsourcing will never replace professional translators because its scope is too limited... also, let's not confuse crowdsourcing with MT... they are two different things, even if they can be used together for a certain scope (see article on IBM's n.Fluent). I believe MT is more of a threat to "us" than crowdsourcing...
And just to be clear, I do not find crowdsourcing a threat at all; as I said before, it is less about the number of words lost to the translation market as what the practice says about our profession.
| | | | paula arturo
United States
Local time: 14:12
Spanish to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | "Our values are defined by what we will tolerate when it is done to others" | Dec 21, 2009 |
@ Williamson: thanks for the link!
@ Giles:
and per-word translation rates have certainly fallen since I did my first paid translations back in the Stone Age, but the increase in productivity has more than compensated for generally lower rates.
I’m glad we agree that rates have been falling and technology has increased productivity for translators. These technologies allow us to translate faster and help maintain consistency. But this increase in productivity, translating more words in less time, also means that when you edit and proofread your work (or have your editor or proofreader do it), you either have to read faster to make the same profit or maintain your normal proofreading/editing time and make less money for your work. It seems to me translation productivity has increased, but when you add in quality control, you’re working more for less.
Francisco is worried about a concentration of economic power. This is fair enough but that sort of thing has accompanied every step change in human economic history since the spread of agriculture. I'm sure those highly skilled, forest-savvy hunter-gatherers were very put out when the first farmers had to build granaries for their excess crops. Technology creates political problems and sooner or later things get sorted out politically.
I respect your view on progress, but I don’t think these sorts of things get sorted out politically. If you look at some of the reports on famine by the World Health Organization, just to name one example, despite the fact that the world currently produces enough food to feed double the amount of inhabitants on our planet, in 2007 there were 923 million people suffering from malnutrition and famine. These problems don’t just get sorted out politically, and concentration of power only benefits those who actually have it.
@ Tim: some companies crowdsource internally and have implemented systems by which their employees need clearance to participate in certain projects.
@ Kevin: I would really love to read the reports you mentioned that show there is a shortage of good translators, I happen to know hundreds of great translators (at least in my language pairs) and have nothing but respect for my colleagues.
Also, being a student doesn’t mean you’re starving. I don’t know what your college days were like, but mine are awesome! In fact, I’m so far from serving I can afford to take the time to go law school and still advocate for the things I believe in (there's still plenty of food on my table and a very nice roof over my head). If I were anywhere near starving, my time would probably be better spent marketing myself, but fortunately I’m not, so I can spend my time on whatever I choose. Perhaps to you your time is better spent marketing yourself, if that’s what works for you, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that. But different people make different choices, and there’s nothing wrong with that either.
@ David: I couldn't agree more on your views on exploitation and what crowdsourcing says about translation.
“If one benefits tangibly from the exploitation of others who are weak, is one morally implicated in their predicament? Or are basic rights of human existence confined to the civilized societies that are wealthy enough to afford them? Our values are defined by what we will tolerate when it is done to others.” William Greider
| | |
|
|
|
| Crowdsourcing or not | Dec 21, 2009 |
Francisco de Azevedo wrote: Farkas, I believe that your summary of the article posted above excludes some key points. You said: FarkasAndras wrote:
IBMs platform is not really crowdsourcing: the article says it is used for internal communication (IBM has employees in dozens of countries) and the system learns from the corrections made by its users. So the idea is not having the employees revise the machine translation of a user manual, just machine translating employees emails sent to each other (and feeding the corrections back into the MT database). It is a bog standard MT setup. Correct me if I am wrong, but a MT technology that evolves based on crowd feedback is not that bog standard to me. Moreover, you neglected to comment on the very inspiring words by IBMs spokesman, Ari Fishkind, in which he refers to the platform as a crowdsourcing idea: The whole point is to continually refine the idioms and the syntax and the context by people who use the language every day
[/quote]
Well, I'd think any MT system that has any ambition these days must incorporate corrected translations into its database if possible. I know Google translate does, and if you're building a MT solution you'd better match it at least, otherwise you might as well just use Google translate...
But I meant "bog standard MT system" more in the sense that it's a bog standard translation-with-MT paradigm: run the text through MT and have humans edit it. In this case the humans editing the material are the senders and recipients, not language professionals recruited for the purpose - that's the only difference. The point is, it's not a crowdsourcing translation scheme. They didn't invite people to translate texts for them; people are translating (editing) the texts they themselves need.
It could be called a crowdsourcing MT training scheme, though.
Of course IBM might release the resulting software, but that won't be a crowdsourcing translation solution either. It will be just another MT software or service that may or may not keep on learning from corrections by its users.
| | | | Giles Watson
Italy
Local time: 20:12
Italian to English
In memoriam | Rates and politics | Dec 21, 2009 |
paula13 wrote:
I’m glad we agree that rates have been falling and technology has increased productivity for translators. These technologies allow us to translate faster and help maintain consistency. But this increase in productivity, translating more words in less time, also means that when you edit and proofread your work (or have your editor or proofreader do it), you either have to read faster to make the same profit or maintain your normal proofreading/editing time and make less money for your work. It seems to me translation productivity has increased, but when you add in quality control, you’re working more for less.
Per-page rates have fallen on average but honestly, it used to take a lot longer to produce that page. Text management is so much easier with computers. You don't have to retype entire pages if you make a single mistake, or queue at the post office to send off your work, or go through any of the other time-consuming routines of the pen-and-ink and typewriter ages. All in all, I earn a considerably higher per-hour rate nowadays than I ever did before computers or the internet appeared, and I am also able to work much more flexibly. YMMV, of course.
These problems don’t just get sorted out politically, and concentration of power only benefits those who actually have it.
We are talking at cross purposes. I include war, pestilence and famine under the general heading of politics, although these are admittedly among the less desirable instruments of political intervention.
My point is that you can't uninvent technology. Once it exists, society has to adapt to it. And if informed consenting adults want to do disgusting things like working for free, I will of course avert my gaze but I still respect their right to do so.
Giles
| | | | Francisco de Azevedo (X)
Argentina
Local time: 15:12
French to Spanish
+ ...
| Let us throw in some Math... | Dec 21, 2009 |
@Gilles:
In one of your last replies, you admitted that, since you started working in the translation industry, you have seen a decrease in translation prices and an increase in productivity due to the incorporation of new technology:
Giles Watson wrote:
It cost - and costs - me time, money and considerable intellectual effort to keep up to date with technological developments, and per-word translation rates have certainly fallen since I did my first paid translations back in the Stone Age, but the increase in productivity has more than compensated for generally lower rates.
Personally, I have not been in the translation market for as long as you have, but even in the 4-5 years or so since I started, I could actually witness a significant price decrease. I believe this experience is probably shared by the large majority of freelance translators and small to medium-size translation businesses. One could illustrate your statement about this common experience with the following graph:
Please note: This graph is only illustrating a tendency, and it is not based on any specific data.
Form a strictly logical or mathematical point of view, what could prevent this price tendency to hit zero if technological innovation keeps increasing productivity? It could be argued that the leap from payed work (price > 0) and free work (price = 0) is of a qualitative rather than quantitative nature, but such an argument would require some sort of sustain that has yet to be provided by any of the participants in this thread. Without such an argument, one can only infer that the aforementioned tendency would be more realistically and accurately depicted by the following graph:
.jpg)
Please note: This graph is only illustrating a tendency, and it is not based on any specific data.
If we stick to that logic, further decline in prices until a zero value is completely possible in a not so distant future. However, in order to make an estimation of the time frame, you would need real data that I do not have.
[Edited at 2009-12-21 17:16 GMT]
| | | | paula arturo
United States
Local time: 14:12
Spanish to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Fair enough... | Dec 21, 2009 |
Hi Giles,
Giles Watson wrote:
Per-page rates have fallen on average but honestly, it used to take a lot longer to produce that page. Text management is so much easier with computers. You don't have to retype entire pages if you make a single mistake, or queue at the post office to send off your work, or go through any of the other time-consuming routines of the pen-and-ink and typewriter ages. All in all, I earn a considerably higher per-hour rate nowadays than I ever did before computers or the internet appeared, and I am also able to work much more flexibly. YMMV, of course.
In all honesty, I was around 10 when the internet started being broadly used. All I know is how it affected my homework and I have absolutely no first hand experience in what translation was like before then or even before CAT tools. I have no doubt these technologies have increased productivity a lot! I'm just wondering whether translators are better off financially. I have a hunch that although some translators today are doing great, those who depend mainly on agencies might be making a lot less. Everything that glistens isn't gold, and although these technologies are essentially great, that doesn't mean people won't use them in ways that are less than questionable.
But back to crowdsourcing though, the essential difference between technological advancements and crowdsourcing is that I don't see how crowdsourcing actually benefits us. I see how it benefits people who are trying to get things translated for free, but not how it helps the actual people doing the translation work.
We are talking at cross purposes. I include war, pestilence and famine under the general heading of politics, although these are admittedly among the less desirable instruments of political intervention.
I understand, however, I have my doubts those get sort out politically either. I don't want to keep taking this conversation further off topic, but hopefully we'll get to share our views on this sometime in the future.
My point is that you can't uninvent technology. Once it exists, society has to adapt to it. And if informed consenting adults want to do disgusting things like working for free, I will of course avert my gaze but I still respect their right to do so.
I agree with your main point, but, I don't think adaptation and "voluntary" exploitation are the same thing. I'm all up for anything new that can help make people's lives better, what I'm not ok with is rich companies using that to get richer while trying to convince crowds that what they're doing is supporting a good cause.
Best,
Paula
| | |
|
|
|
Giles Watson
Italy
Local time: 20:12
Italian to English
In memoriam | There's more than one translation market | Dec 21, 2009 |
Francisco de Azevedo wrote:
Personally, I have not been in the translation market for as long as you have, but even in the 4-5 years or so since I started, I could actually witness a significant price decrease. I believe this experience is probably shared by the large majority of freelance translators and small to medium-size translation businesses.
You're absolutely right, Francisco. That's why I specialise.
Average per-page rates *offered* by outsourcers have been falling steadily but rates from clients who want my services have risen in real terms. I have never been short of work either. Other translators who specialise in markets where there is a certain amount of money sloshing about will tell you much the same thing.
As Kevin has pointed out in another post, while there are plenty of people who are keen to translate at breathtakingly low rates, there aren't enough specialists. So select a juicy market segment and train up.
Giles
| | | | paula arturo
United States
Local time: 14:12
Spanish to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | While we’re on the subject of specialization... | Dec 21, 2009 |
Hi again Giles!
You're absolutely right, Francisco. That's why I specialise. Average per-page rates *offered* by outsourcers have been falling steadily but rates from clients who want my services have risen in real terms. I have never been short of work either. Other translators who specialise in markets where there is a certain amount of money sloshing about will tell you much the same thing.
I agree with both you and Fran and while we’re on the subject of specialization, in my experience the reason why specialized translation pays so much better is basically because of the lack of competition. Those of us who have found our niche can afford to raise our prices because we’ve added some sort of value to our service that other translators haven’t been able to add yet (or have chosen not to add).
In my case, law firms and labs (for legal docs, of course) would rather pay a soon-to-be-lawyer than a regular translator because they consider that someone who is in law school will have a much deeper understanding of their texts, particularly in my language pair because you are not just translating between languages but rather between legal systems (i.e. continental vs. common law). Understanding the complexities of certain terms and principles in legal texts can literally make or break a contract or paper. This should make me feel really safe and secure. I doubt that too many translators will go to law school just to be able to add value to their service. I think that example pretty much sums up the logic behind the specialization argument, and that logic is impeccable to a point.
However, in my (limited... very limited!) understanding of economy, the greater the supply, the lower the demand, the lower the prices. So if other markets are indeed affected and people start to look to specialization as the solution, more translators who are currently not specialized will begin to specialize to survive and that, would ultimately, lower the price of specialized translation as well, which takes me back to the whole, “even though it’s not affecting you directly now, that doesn’t mean it won’t affect you in the future” thing I’ve been bugging everyone about.
Even if a lot of translators go out of business as a result of such market trends, the ones that remain and specialize will still affect the monetary worth of that added value. If specialization becomes the trend, it will cease to be “special” enough to justify its price. What was once an exception would simply become the rule, and no one would be able to justify charging that extra plus for following the rule. By that rationale, even specialized translators would not be able to prevent eventually falling into the trend Fran described. But, of course, that is based on a limited understanding of how the economy works, and I could not stress the word “limited” enough, I hated having to take economy! (Although I understand it was a necessary evil )
Best,
Paula
| | | | Laurent KRAULAND (X)
France
Local time: 20:12
French to German
+ ...
| As a paradox.. | Dec 22, 2009 |
paula13 wrote: Even if a lot of translators go out of business as a result of such market trends, the ones that remain and specialize will still affect the monetary worth of that added value. If specialization becomes the trend, it will cease to be “special” enough to justify its price. What was once an exception would simply become the rule, and no one would be able to justify charging that extra plus for following the rule. By that rationale, even specialized translators would not be able to prevent eventually falling into the trend Fran described. But, of course, that is based on a limited understanding of how the economy works, and I could not stress the word “limited” enough, I hated having to take economy! (Although I understand it was a necessary evil ) Best, Paula
Hi Paula and Giles, below is my "limited" point of view / input:
As a paradox, some colleagues I am in private contact with do not think a lot of "specialization", stressing that they are writers first and foremost, which in turn doesn't mean that they are Jacks of all trades... Specialization has been indeed advocated by professional associations such as the ATA, but this did not prevent rates / prices from dropping even in specialties, albeit maybe for a bunch of other reasons. And which agency will want to hire a law specialist to make an informative translation of a contract when a generalist can do it too, let's say at 75% of the rate offered by the specialist?(*) With direct clients, the matter will indeed be looked at from a different angle.
We should be careful with specialization, it is a double-edged (s)word.
(*) As an example, and at least in France, one does not need to have a law degree to become a sworn translator and there are no exams for that purpose...
[Edited at 2009-12-22 07:14 GMT]
| | | | Giles Watson
Italy
Local time: 20:12
Italian to English
In memoriam | You gotta learn to live with what you can't rise above | Dec 22, 2009 |
Paula: Even if a lot of translators go out of business as a result of such market trends, the ones that remain and specialize will still affect the monetary worth of that added value. If specialization becomes the trend, it will cease to be “special” enough to justify its price. What was once an exception would simply become the rule, and no one would be able to justify charging that extra plus for following the rule. By that rationale, even specialized translators would not be able to prevent eventually falling into the trend Fran described. But, of course, that is based on a limited understanding of how the economy works, and I could not stress the word “limited” enough, I hated having to take economy! (Although I understand it was a necessary evil )
In practice, it takes a long time to specialise in most of the lucrative fields and even longer to make a name for yourself. On the upside, experience adds more value in specialist areas than it does in general translation and clients who need specialists tend to stick with good ones when they find them. It's not that they're sentimental or anything like that. It's just that they know that specialists are difficult to replace.
Laurent:
And which agency will want to hire a law specialist to make an informative translation of a contract when a generalist can do it too, let's say at 75% of the rate offered by the specialist? With direct clients, the matter will indeed be looked at from a different angle.
Three points: i) I very, very rarely work for agencies and when I do I charge direct-client rates; ii) generalists tend not to do as good a job as specialists in most fields because, as Paula says, they may have acquired the terminology but they fail to grasp the underlying principles; iii) if you have established a premium rate for your specialist translations, it is usually possible to demand a premium for your more generalist work.
We should be careful with specialization, it is a double-edged sword.
I really can't see the downside. Specialisation just means that you have gone into one or more subjects rather more thoroughly than most of your competitors. From the client's point of view, what's not to like?
BTW, the header of this post is from a Bruce Springsteen song that continues (I think, but my memory is going these days): "if you wanna ride on down in through this tunnel of crowdsourced translations".
Specialise to rise
Giles
| | |
|
|
|
Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 20:12
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| Some late comments about crowdsourcing | Dec 22, 2009 |
paula13 wrote:
Translators for Ethical Business Practices (TEBP) has just created its first online petition against crowdsourcing on Facebook and Twitter.
I don't think crowdsourcing is unethical. The only way in which crowdsourcing may be unethical is that it may encourage more people to use the internet not in their own language but in English, because the English version of a crowdsourced site is sometimes the most comprehensible.
Crowdsourcing is not a cheap way to get a translation. Setting up and maintaining a crowdsourcing system and community may actually be more pricey than hiring a few cheap translators.
The important thing to remember with crowdsourcing is that the end-product will be of inferior quality. Crowdsourcing can have benefits that outweigh the fact that the translation is poor -- for one, it encourages community participation, which in turn helps to promote the site through word of mouth. And regular site users are more likely to understand what terms mean out of context than professional translators may ever be.
Professional translators and interpreters all over the world have been expressing their concerns over the ethical problems posed by crowdsourcing and how this practice negatively impacts an already suffering industry...
I won't ask you to back the first part of your statement with evidence, but as for the second part, namely that crowdsourcing negatively impacts our industry, my question is... how? How would crowdsourcing have a negative impact on the translation industry?
The decision to translate a web site by crowdsourcing takes away one short-term job from one translator, three to four reviewers and up to ten beta testers (although it creates one long-term job for perhaps up to five programmers and community developers).
And when people see the results of crowdsourcing, surely they would they be more likely (not less likely) to consider using a professional translator for their next translation job? Perhaps crowdsourcing even helps combat the idea that any bilingual person can do a translation, and this may teach/encourage bilingual people in the corporate world to hire real translators instead of hacking away at texts themselves.
The job of translators and interpreters is not simply to translate words, but rather to convey meaning and concepts as well as to provide cultural localization.
True, but the effectiveness of a web site localisation depends to a large degree on how well the localisation system is designed and how comprehensive the quality control systems are. I'm sure many translators can testify to having translated web sites where the source text is simply a spreadsheet with words and phrases out of context and very little explanatory text provided.
Crowdsourcing bases itself on ... translation provided by ... people who are desperate to find ways of promoting their services and hope this form of exploitation will later translate into paid work.
None of the crowdsourcing systems I have seen give credit to translators in any comprehensive way that may "promote one's service" or "lead to paid work". Can you name a few examples of crowdsourcing systems that enable this sort of thing?
| | | | | Starving students, specilists and shortage | Dec 22, 2009 |
paula13 wrote:
@ Kevin: I would really love to read the reports you mentioned that show there is a shortage of good translators, I happen to know hundreds of great translators (at least in my language pairs) and have nothing but respect for my colleagues.
Also, being a student doesn’t mean you’re starving. I don’t know what your college days were like, but mine are awesome!
Paula, I take it you aren't familiar with the cliché of the "starving student" and all the businesses that use that phrase in their names. Having attended Occidental College, I'm quite aware that many students do not in fact starve. Or if they do, they hand you the keys to their Mercedes and ask if you'll pick up a pizza or a burger for them somewhere.
However, whether starving or pampered by daddy's money, students tend not to have a good idea of the worth of services and mis-price them. Especially if they do not bear the costs of their room, board, tuition and other expenses from the money they earn each month. Those that do are another matter entirely.
The articles I mention have been posted occasionally as links on ProZ and I see them referenced in various Twitter feeds. Being a student up to date with the latest research skills, I'm sure you did an online search using such key phrases as "shortage of translators" and found information like this, various gripes about the shortage of Arabic translators, native EN speakers for Dutch>English and others. You may rightly object that the examples cited here are very special cases (some articles seen recently were more general, but I can't vouch for the quality of research carried out by the journalists), but that's also part of the point. It's up to you to identify the unique markets that you may be able to address to your best advantage. Your ES>EN combination is overpopulated perhaps, and I've noticed that some South American colleagues keep a sharp knife ready for the throats of their colleagues when it comes to matters of pricing. But is that pair really so crowded if you need a translation specialist in maritime law? Or one who is really competent in oenology? The bilingual secretaries looking for a more independent life might indeed find a tough world out there, but that will be true for most commodity job descriptions in hard times.
@Giovanni: looks like we're in a dead heat in the race to The Reaper, so indeed, MT will probably not wreak havoc on the better segments of the market in our lifetime. What Francisco fails to realize with his comment a way back regarding the "quality argument" is that I'm not interested in arguing about it nor in selling quality to someone who can feed himself just as well on something less. There are enough prospects who actually need quality translation work to compete in their markets or avoid legal and regulatory problems that I do not need to chase after the sausage vendor on Friedrichstrasse who wants a sign to sell his juicy delights to passing tourists better. If he can get by with MT, good for him. Ditto for the guy who wants a love letter translated for his Canadian pen pal.
Giles' observation that one tends to get the specialist rates for general translations from the same client is also in line with my experience. Paula's argument that if everyone specializes, nothing will be special about doing so any more (or however it was phrased) is a logical sieve. It's like I told an agency who called a while back when the PM complained that the rate I wanted for a job was more than she had quoted to the end customer: "OK, you go find a qualified chemist with a high level of competence in English and German who is a court-sworn translator in Germany and can correctly translate this complex patent and certify it for the filing in the US next week." Half an hour later she called back to accept the offer. It's a matter of knowing your market Just try crowdsourcing that one or finding a computer sworn by the courts.
| | | | Ade Indarta
Indonesia
Local time: 01:12
Member (2007)
English to Indonesian
| What I am worried about... | Dec 22, 2009 |
Crowdsourcing is a fact. Whether we like it or not, it is there and we will see more of it in the future. As a matter a fact, it will create more jobs for us. Instead of doing translation, however, we will end up editing the crowd's translation, working with the client to make the best quality system for the crowdsourced materials, etc.
What I am worried about is when the professional joins this trend, doing professional work for free. This is what the company will try to do in the ... See more Crowdsourcing is a fact. Whether we like it or not, it is there and we will see more of it in the future. As a matter a fact, it will create more jobs for us. Instead of doing translation, however, we will end up editing the crowd's translation, working with the client to make the best quality system for the crowdsourced materials, etc.
What I am worried about is when the professional joins this trend, doing professional work for free. This is what the company will try to do in the near future: creating a system or atmoshpere where professional is willing to work for free.
The sign is here. In our own very site, translators are willingly to translate proz.com for some trade. Soon there will be more offers from different companies to translate their product for free. I will not be surprised if soon there is a soap company offering their soap for us to translate their commercial.
Regards,
Ade ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Professional Translators Against Crowdsourcing and Other Unethical Business Practices | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
| | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
