| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7] > | Who is not using MT today? Thread poster: Gary Evans
|
|---|
[Edited at 2019-08-18 20:40 GMT]
| | | | | Excellent, Katalin! | Aug 18, 2019 |
Katalin Szilárd wrote: Plus a question to Gary: If you are a freelance translator and you are living ONLY from providing translations full-time then why are you happy providing lower costs to your clients? Simply it doesn't make sense.  "benefits from lower costs" Lower costs = you have to work more to get the same amount of money as you used to -> so you'll be more tired -> so you'll make more mistakes -> and the quality of your work will decline. End of the story. [Edited at 2019-08-16 07:52 GMT]
| | | | Jo Macdonald 
Spain
Local time: 16:24
Italian to English
+ ...
| The way MT is being used and quality | Aug 19, 2019 |
I’m willing to work with MT but haven’t so far because the rates offered just aren’t interesting to me as a pro translator.
There’s no way I’ll accept a complicated revision job for €0.02/word. I think this goes for most pros too. Even those who might accept such a low rate will soon realise it’s just not worth their time as they’ll be busy earning next to nothing and miss a good job when it comes along, one that would have earned them more for less work, producing a qualit... See more I’m willing to work with MT but haven’t so far because the rates offered just aren’t interesting to me as a pro translator.
There’s no way I’ll accept a complicated revision job for €0.02/word. I think this goes for most pros too. Even those who might accept such a low rate will soon realise it’s just not worth their time as they’ll be busy earning next to nothing and miss a good job when it comes along, one that would have earned them more for less work, producing a quality result.
Even though some MT is not a total disaster it still needs revising if you want the result to be a faithful translation of the original. The low rates offered for PEMT seem to suggest clients, agencies and PMs are either not interested in quality and will therefore trust a cheap-rate checker (who presumably has no decent translation work) to revise the MT output, or simply don’t understand a pro won’t be interested in such low rates and believe a non-pro will produce acceptable quality on the cheap.
MT may be here to stay but imo MT fans really need to rethink the way they’re using it if it’s going to work.
There is also still a lot of really bad quality MT out there. I tried to watch a Korean film the other night and the subtitles just did not make sense, ruining what is probably a pretty good film. Save one thou and ruin something you’ve spent over 100 times that much to make, it’s a funny old world.
This non-sense use of MT actually makes more sense to me than paying a cheap checker in the hope they will somehow miraculously produce something of quality.
If you don’t want quality from MT don’t spend any money on it, and accept the damage cheap “translation” can do.
I think clients are actually starting to realise this.
I was contacted last year by a new client who sent me a repetitive technical project that was partially translated with the PEMT segments they’d been using until then. I explained a lot of the terms were totally wrong for the sector because the “checker” was obviously not a mother-tongue pro and had no knowledge of the field. I offered to do the job at my full rate for all the segments, ignoring the TM. This client now sends me regular work as they obviously want quality translations and not bad MT looked over by a checker who’s only qualification in the translation sector is to do a bad job. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Gary Evans
Germany
Local time: 16:24
German to English
TOPIC STARTER | Never comprimise on rates and quality | Aug 19, 2019 |
Hi Jo,
A low quality MT engine is of no use to anyone. Likewise a proofreader who is crap. It's a bad combination.
What works is a combination of good MT, a decent CAT tool, especially the term base (TB) and a good proofreader who is a native speaker in the target language.
As for agencies offering pathetic rates, avoid them.
None of these issues are arguments against the use of MT when applied properly.
Regards,
Gary
Jo Macdonald wrote:
I’m willing to work with MT but haven’t so far because the rates offered just aren’t interesting to me as a pro translator.
There’s no way I’ll accept a complicated revision job for €0.02/word. I think this goes for most pros too. Even those who might accept such a low rate will soon realise it’s just not worth their time as they’ll be busy earning next to nothing and miss a good job when it comes along, one that would have earned them more for less work, producing a quality result.
Even though some MT is not a total disaster it still needs revising if you want the result to be a faithful translation of the original. The low rates offered for PEMT seem to suggest clients, agencies and PMs are either not interested in quality and will therefore trust a cheap-rate checker (who presumably has no decent translation work) to revise the MT output, or simply don’t understand a pro won’t be interested in such low rates and believe a non-pro will produce acceptable quality on the cheap.
MT may be here to stay but imo MT fans really need to rethink the way they’re using it if it’s going to work.
There is also still a lot of really bad quality MT out there. I tried to watch a Korean film the other night and the subtitles just did not make sense, ruining what is probably a pretty good film. Save one thou and ruin something you’ve spent over 100 times that much to make, it’s a funny old world.
This non-sense use of MT actually makes more sense to me than paying a cheap checker in the hope they will somehow miraculously produce something of quality.
If you don’t want quality from MT don’t spend any money on it, and accept the damage cheap “translation” can do.
I think clients are actually starting to realise this.
I was contacted last year by a new client who sent me a repetitive technical project that was partially translated with the PEMT segments they’d been using until then. I explained a lot of the terms were totally wrong for the sector because the “checker” was obviously not a mother-tongue pro and had no knowledge of the field. I offered to do the job at my full rate for all the segments, ignoring the TM. This client now sends me regular work as they obviously want quality translations and not bad MT looked over by a checker who’s only qualification in the translation sector is to do a bad job.
| | |
|
|
|
Gary Evans
Germany
Local time: 16:24
German to English
TOPIC STARTER | Who's working more for less? | Aug 19, 2019 |
Hi Katalin,
Who said I was working more for less income? MT can help increase productivity just like any CAT tool.
I can see that you're concerned about agencies getting people to to PETM work at low rates, but that's not what I do.
The translation industry is facing major disruption to business as usual, with the threat of loses in traditional translating jobs, but on the other hand, new opportunities are arising too. Rejecting powerful CAT tools just be... See more Hi Katalin,
Who said I was working more for less income? MT can help increase productivity just like any CAT tool.
I can see that you're concerned about agencies getting people to to PETM work at low rates, but that's not what I do.
The translation industry is facing major disruption to business as usual, with the threat of loses in traditional translating jobs, but on the other hand, new opportunities are arising too. Rejecting powerful CAT tools just because some agencies are offering extremely low rates is not a good idea IMO.
Regards,
Gary
Katalin Szilárd wrote: Gary Evans wrote:
BTW. I've discovered a neat solution in one respect. I sometimes use MT to automatically translate whole documents in one go and then sit with the client as we proofread them together. The client pays an hourly rate and benefits from lower costs, plus they get English lessons at the same time. Quick and dirty you may think, but it works really well as it offers a different business model for me. Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
What are you trying to do here? Notwithstanding this strange setup where a client has the time and skill to work with you that way, why in the world would you charge less? It's still you, the human translator who judges the MT output and decides what's right or wrong, what is stylistically unacceptable, which sentence structures need to be fixed, which terms are completely wrong, etc. You are selling yourself cheap. providing an intellectual service that requires your "human" knowledge and skill" to make sure the translation is accurate. The machine is not going to do that for you. And that is essential, especially in the legal, medical and technical fields.
I totally agree with Bernhard. Plus a question to Gary: If you are a freelance translator and you are living ONLY from providing translations full-time then why are you happy providing lower costs to your clients? Simply it doesn't make sense. "benefits from lower costs" Lower costs = you have to work more to get the same amount of money as you used to -> so you'll be more tired -> so you'll make more mistakes -> and the quality of your work will decline. End of the story. [Edited at 2019-08-16 07:52 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | What we should concern about: programmed hypes | Aug 19, 2019 |
Gary Evans wrote: Hi Katalin, Who said I was working more for less income? MT can help increase productivity just like any CAT tool. I can see that you're concerned about agencies getting people to to PETM work at low rates, but that's not what I do. The translation industry is facing major disruption to business as usual, with the threat of loses in traditional translating jobs, but on the other hand, new opportunities are arising too. Rejecting powerful CAT tools just because some agencies are offering extremely low rates is not a good idea IMO. Regards, Gary Katalin Szilárd wrote: Gary Evans wrote:
BTW. I've discovered a neat solution in one respect. I sometimes use MT to automatically translate whole documents in one go and then sit with the client as we proofread them together. The client pays an hourly rate and benefits from lower costs, plus they get English lessons at the same time. Quick and dirty you may think, but it works really well as it offers a different business model for me. Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
What are you trying to do here? Notwithstanding this strange setup where a client has the time and skill to work with you that way, why in the world would you charge less? It's still you, the human translator who judges the MT output and decides what's right or wrong, what is stylistically unacceptable, which sentence structures need to be fixed, which terms are completely wrong, etc. You are selling yourself cheap. providing an intellectual service that requires your "human" knowledge and skill" to make sure the translation is accurate. The machine is not going to do that for you. And that is essential, especially in the legal, medical and technical fields.
I totally agree with Bernhard. Plus a question to Gary: If you are a freelance translator and you are living ONLY from providing translations full-time then why are you happy providing lower costs to your clients? Simply it doesn't make sense. "benefits from lower costs" Lower costs = you have to work more to get the same amount of money as you used to -> so you'll be more tired -> so you'll make more mistakes -> and the quality of your work will decline. End of the story. [Edited at 2019-08-16 07:52 GMT]
Hi Gary,
You wrote: "The client pays an hourly rate and benefits from lower costs"
This means your income is less.
I'm more concerned about people receiving/reading more and more programmed hypes nowadays.
It is like fake news. We should stop them.
Programmed hypes:
1. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/amazon/amazon-program-has-warehouse-workers-tweet-positive-comments-about-working-conditions/
2. Programmed hype based on the above scheme:
Freelancers please join and translate for free to help others (khmm "or help us to make more money") and post your psychedelic happiness
3. Programmed hype: MT/AI/NLP
4. Programmed hype:
Go get retired (we don't need professional translators, who don't want to work with MT) and mentor/teach fresh translators who may be willing to use MT
5. Programmed hype:
Adapt to the recent technology
etc.
[Edited at 2019-08-19 10:28 GMT]
| | | | Gary Evans
Germany
Local time: 16:24
German to English
TOPIC STARTER | A case for native speakers | Aug 19, 2019 |
Hi Katalin,
"What we should concern about: programmed hypes"
Hype is a strange word. It rarely comes with the indefinite article 'a', nor does it like to form a plural (as in hypes). I just put this though an MT engine, edited it a bit and got this:
"What we should be concerned about: programmed hype"
A good MT engine combined with a native speaker is a powerful combination.
QED,
Gary
Katalin Szilárd wrote: Gary Evans wrote: Hi Katalin, Who said I was working more for less income? MT can help increase productivity just like any CAT tool. I can see that you're concerned about agencies getting people to to PETM work at low rates, but that's not what I do. The translation industry is facing major disruption to business as usual, with the threat of loses in traditional translating jobs, but on the other hand, new opportunities are arising too. Rejecting powerful CAT tools just because some agencies are offering extremely low rates is not a good idea IMO. Regards, Gary Katalin Szilárd wrote: Gary Evans wrote:
BTW. I've discovered a neat solution in one respect. I sometimes use MT to automatically translate whole documents in one go and then sit with the client as we proofread them together. The client pays an hourly rate and benefits from lower costs, plus they get English lessons at the same time. Quick and dirty you may think, but it works really well as it offers a different business model for me. Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
What are you trying to do here? Notwithstanding this strange setup where a client has the time and skill to work with you that way, why in the world would you charge less? It's still you, the human translator who judges the MT output and decides what's right or wrong, what is stylistically unacceptable, which sentence structures need to be fixed, which terms are completely wrong, etc. You are selling yourself cheap. providing an intellectual service that requires your "human" knowledge and skill" to make sure the translation is accurate. The machine is not going to do that for you. And that is essential, especially in the legal, medical and technical fields.
I totally agree with Bernhard. Plus a question to Gary: If you are a freelance translator and you are living ONLY from providing translations full-time then why are you happy providing lower costs to your clients? Simply it doesn't make sense. "benefits from lower costs" Lower costs = you have to work more to get the same amount of money as you used to -> so you'll be more tired -> so you'll make more mistakes -> and the quality of your work will decline. End of the story. [Edited at 2019-08-16 07:52 GMT] Hi Gary, You wrote: "The client pays an hourly rate and benefits from lower costs" This means your income is less. I'm more concerned about people receiving/reading more and more programmed hypes nowadays. It is like fake news. We should stop them. Programmed hypes: 1. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/amazon/amazon-program-has-warehouse-workers-tweet-positive-comments-about-working-conditions/ 2. Programmed hype based on the above scheme: Freelancers please join and translate for free to help others (khmm "or help us to make more money") and post your psychedelic happiness 3. Programmed hype: MT/AI/NLP 4. Programmed hype: Go get retired (we don't need professional translators, who don't want to work with MT) and mentor/teach fresh translators who may be willing to use MT 5. Programmed hype: Adapt to the recent technology etc. [Edited at 2019-08-19 10:28 GMT]
| | | | | Meaning of hype in the last 2 years | Aug 19, 2019 |
Gary Evans wrote: Hi Katalin, "What we should concern about: programmed hypes" Hype is a strange word. It rarely comes with the indefinite article 'a', nor does it like to form a plural (as in hypes). I just put this though an MT engine, edited it a bit and got this: "What we should be concerned about: programmed hype" A good MT engine combined with a native speaker is a powerful combination. QED, Gary Katalin Szilárd wrote: Gary Evans wrote: Hi Katalin, Who said I was working more for less income? MT can help increase productivity just like any CAT tool. I can see that you're concerned about agencies getting people to to PETM work at low rates, but that's not what I do. The translation industry is facing major disruption to business as usual, with the threat of loses in traditional translating jobs, but on the other hand, new opportunities are arising too. Rejecting powerful CAT tools just because some agencies are offering extremely low rates is not a good idea IMO. Regards, Gary Katalin Szilárd wrote: Gary Evans wrote:
BTW. I've discovered a neat solution in one respect. I sometimes use MT to automatically translate whole documents in one go and then sit with the client as we proofread them together. The client pays an hourly rate and benefits from lower costs, plus they get English lessons at the same time. Quick and dirty you may think, but it works really well as it offers a different business model for me. Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
What are you trying to do here? Notwithstanding this strange setup where a client has the time and skill to work with you that way, why in the world would you charge less? It's still you, the human translator who judges the MT output and decides what's right or wrong, what is stylistically unacceptable, which sentence structures need to be fixed, which terms are completely wrong, etc. You are selling yourself cheap. providing an intellectual service that requires your "human" knowledge and skill" to make sure the translation is accurate. The machine is not going to do that for you. And that is essential, especially in the legal, medical and technical fields.
I totally agree with Bernhard. Plus a question to Gary: If you are a freelance translator and you are living ONLY from providing translations full-time then why are you happy providing lower costs to your clients? Simply it doesn't make sense. "benefits from lower costs" Lower costs = you have to work more to get the same amount of money as you used to -> so you'll be more tired -> so you'll make more mistakes -> and the quality of your work will decline. End of the story. [Edited at 2019-08-16 07:52 GMT] Hi Gary, You wrote: "The client pays an hourly rate and benefits from lower costs" This means your income is less. I'm more concerned about people receiving/reading more and more programmed hypes nowadays. It is like fake news. We should stop them. Programmed hypes: 1. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/amazon/amazon-program-has-warehouse-workers-tweet-positive-comments-about-working-conditions/ 2. Programmed hype based on the above scheme: Freelancers please join and translate for free to help others (khmm "or help us to make more money") and post your psychedelic happiness 3. Programmed hype: MT/AI/NLP 4. Programmed hype: Go get retired (we don't need professional translators, who don't want to work with MT) and mentor/teach fresh translators who may be willing to use MT 5. Programmed hype: Adapt to the recent technology etc. [Edited at 2019-08-19 10:28 GMT]
Programmed hype in recent years mean(s) ad or ads that bring tremendous amount of money for a group of people, they are placed in a form of very positive comments about certain tools, technologies, theories etc. on sites, social media sites written by people (sometimes by bots) within that industry. So it is based on psychology: some people believe/trust more if it is written by somebody who works within that industry.
[Edited at 2019-08-19 11:05 GMT]
[Edited at 2019-08-19 11:06 GMT]
[Edited at 2019-08-19 11:23 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| A case of an ad hominem argument | Aug 19, 2019 |
Gary Evans wrote:
A case for native speakers
Hi Katalin [Szilárd],
"What we should concern about: programmed hypes"
Hype is a strange word. It rarely comes with the indefinite article 'a', nor does it like to form a plural (as in hypes). I just put this though an MT engine, edited it a bit and got this:
"What we should be concerned about: programmed hype"
A good MT engine combined with a native speaker is a powerful combination.
QED,
Gary
https://effectiviology.com/ad-hominem-fallacy/
Aside from the veiled personal attack against a colleague, I fail to understand why you felt the need to use an MT engine (from EN to EN???) if you still had to edit "it a bit". For a native EN speaker it would have been faster and easier to just edit that sentence, no?
I guess your MT engine (or the post-editing) failed here, on your own website:
https://allenglishmatters.wordpress.com/references/
"We work with selected clients to provide English services including teaching and translating. Our main focus is on delivering open source E-learning courses using the Moodle platofrm for students in North Rhine Westphalia."
[Edited at 2019-08-19 12:02 GMT]
| | | | Gary Evans
Germany
Local time: 16:24
German to English
TOPIC STARTER | I don't work for Amazon | Aug 19, 2019 |
Hi Katalin,
I can assure you I do not work for any corporation. Everything I have posted here is genuinely from me. By making this claim against me, you are employing the classic ad hom attack, rather than addressing the question. My apologies for acting in kind.
My question relates to the use (or not) of MT by translators. I'm curious to know why it's not being used. My suspicion that many agencies refuse to allow translators to make use of it has largely been confirme... See more Hi Katalin,
I can assure you I do not work for any corporation. Everything I have posted here is genuinely from me. By making this claim against me, you are employing the classic ad hom attack, rather than addressing the question. My apologies for acting in kind.
My question relates to the use (or not) of MT by translators. I'm curious to know why it's not being used. My suspicion that many agencies refuse to allow translators to make use of it has largely been confirmed on this thread. Data protection is not justified if the data is safe. And if the TM works well, why not use it? Agencies are increasingly using MT and farming out postediting, and therefore threatening our income with this model. Neither you, not I are interested in working for less. MT is seems is a double-edged sword. Just shunning it would be a mistake IMO.
Regards,
Gary
Katalin Szilárd wrote: Gary Evans wrote: Hi Katalin, "What we should concern about: programmed hypes" Hype is a strange word. It rarely comes with the indefinite article 'a', nor does it like to form a plural (as in hypes). I just put this though an MT engine, edited it a bit and got this: "What we should be concerned about: programmed hype" A good MT engine combined with a native speaker is a powerful combination. QED, Gary Katalin Szilárd wrote: Gary Evans wrote: Hi Katalin, Who said I was working more for less income? MT can help increase productivity just like any CAT tool. I can see that you're concerned about agencies getting people to to PETM work at low rates, but that's not what I do. The translation industry is facing major disruption to business as usual, with the threat of loses in traditional translating jobs, but on the other hand, new opportunities are arising too. Rejecting powerful CAT tools just because some agencies are offering extremely low rates is not a good idea IMO. Regards, Gary Katalin Szilárd wrote: Gary Evans wrote:
BTW. I've discovered a neat solution in one respect. I sometimes use MT to automatically translate whole documents in one go and then sit with the client as we proofread them together. The client pays an hourly rate and benefits from lower costs, plus they get English lessons at the same time. Quick and dirty you may think, but it works really well as it offers a different business model for me. Bernhard Sulzer wrote:
What are you trying to do here? Notwithstanding this strange setup where a client has the time and skill to work with you that way, why in the world would you charge less? It's still you, the human translator who judges the MT output and decides what's right or wrong, what is stylistically unacceptable, which sentence structures need to be fixed, which terms are completely wrong, etc. You are selling yourself cheap. providing an intellectual service that requires your "human" knowledge and skill" to make sure the translation is accurate. The machine is not going to do that for you. And that is essential, especially in the legal, medical and technical fields.
I totally agree with Bernhard. Plus a question to Gary: If you are a freelance translator and you are living ONLY from providing translations full-time then why are you happy providing lower costs to your clients? Simply it doesn't make sense. "benefits from lower costs" Lower costs = you have to work more to get the same amount of money as you used to -> so you'll be more tired -> so you'll make more mistakes -> and the quality of your work will decline. End of the story. [Edited at 2019-08-16 07:52 GMT] Hi Gary, You wrote: "The client pays an hourly rate and benefits from lower costs" This means your income is less. I'm more concerned about people receiving/reading more and more programmed hypes nowadays. It is like fake news. We should stop them. Programmed hypes: 1. https://www.seattletimes.com/business/amazon/amazon-program-has-warehouse-workers-tweet-positive-comments-about-working-conditions/ 2. Programmed hype based on the above scheme: Freelancers please join and translate for free to help others (khmm "or help us to make more money") and post your psychedelic happiness 3. Programmed hype: MT/AI/NLP 4. Programmed hype: Go get retired (we don't need professional translators, who don't want to work with MT) and mentor/teach fresh translators who may be willing to use MT 5. Programmed hype: Adapt to the recent technology etc. [Edited at 2019-08-19 10:28 GMT] Programmed hype in recent years mean(s) ad or ads that bring tremendous amount of money for a group of people, they are placed in a form of very positive comments about certain tools, technologies, theories etc. on sites, social media sites written by people (sometimes by bots) within that industry. So it is based on psychology: some people believe/trust more if it is written by somebody who works within that industry. [Edited at 2019-08-19 11:05 GMT] [Edited at 2019-08-19 11:06 GMT] [Edited at 2019-08-19 11:23 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Gary Evans
Germany
Local time: 16:24
German to English
TOPIC STARTER | Just playing with my toys | Aug 19, 2019 |
Hi Katalin,
I agree, ad hom attacks are not very constructive. How about we go back to addressing my question instead?
I use various CAT tools, including MT engines. One thing I like doing is taking imperfect texts and translating them into another language and then back again into the source to see what changes it has made. I can then go through any improvements I can spot with the person who wrote the original text. I do this as part of my teaching work of course. Had... See more Hi Katalin,
I agree, ad hom attacks are not very constructive. How about we go back to addressing my question instead?
I use various CAT tools, including MT engines. One thing I like doing is taking imperfect texts and translating them into another language and then back again into the source to see what changes it has made. I can then go through any improvements I can spot with the person who wrote the original text. I do this as part of my teaching work of course. Had I not come across MT in my translating work, I would never have thought of (ab)using MT in this way.
But how can we as translators best make use of CAT tools like MT? For some tasks it's of no help, that''s clear, but for others it's a real help. Ideally I would like to use an open source MT engine. If I could I would add error categories and link these to tips on improvements, but that's my construction site right now.
Regards,
Gary
BTW. Thanks for spotting a typo in my website!
Katalin Horváth McClure wrote: Gary Evans wrote:
A case for native speakers
Hi Katalin [Szilárd],
"What we should concern about: programmed hypes"
Hype is a strange word. It rarely comes with the indefinite article 'a', nor does it like to form a plural (as in hypes). I just put this though an MT engine, edited it a bit and got this:
"What we should be concerned about: programmed hype"
A good MT engine combined with a native speaker is a powerful combination.
QED,
Gary
https://effectiviology.com/ad-hominem-fallacy/ Aside from the veiled personal attack against a colleague, I fail to understand why you felt the need to use an MT engine (from EN to EN???) if you still had to edit "it a bit". For a native EN speaker it would have been faster and easier to just edit that sentence, no? I guess your MT engine (or the post-editing) failed here, on your own website: https://allenglishmatters.wordpress.com/references/ "We work with selected clients to provide English services including teaching and translating. Our main focus is on delivering open source E-learning courses using the Moodle platofrm for students in North Rhine Westphalia." [Edited at 2019-08-19 12:02 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Tom Hoar (X)
United States
Local time: 10:24
English
| Just say "no" to what? | Aug 19, 2019 |
I totally agree with all of your points, except with the implication that MT == Cloud.
Dan Lucas wrote:
The only way to be sure, at this stage, is not to use MT for sensitive documents.
Not quite. There's a broad superstition among translators, clients and MT vendors that MT only comes from online services (cloud).
Merriam-Webster, definition #2
superstition: a notion maintained despite evidence to the contrary
I opened this discussion specifically about this misconception.
https://www.proz.com/post/2807458
There are affordable applications that give companies the benefits of MT without the cloud (and better quality than generic cloud services). In another comment, I mentioned my biggest customer with 40 translators. Their total investment in all software licenses was about $2500. I'm criticized by the MT vendors (of which I'm not) for leaving money on the table. They think the sale should be 10x what I charged. Okay, well... I have a different business than them.
Tom
[Edited at 2019-08-19 14:48 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Tom Hoar (X)
United States
Local time: 10:24
English
| Adding meaning that's not there... | Aug 19, 2019 |
Gary Evans wrote:
So your argument against MT comes down to data security...
Gary, I'm not making an argument nor am I against MT. I'm not sure where you drew that conclusion. Please don't add meaning that wasn't there.
I simply shared that T&Cs are mostly not read at all or sometimes misread. That's not an argument. It's just a fact for online MT, online CAT tools, Google services, Facebook services and almost every online service out there.
Now, please don't jump to the conclusion that I'm against the cloud. I'm not. I simply point out that most people prefer to live an ignorance is bliss existence rather than read and understand the T&C.
Gary Evans wrote:
You should read my T&Cs
If I knew which service you use, I'd be happy to read the T&Cs.
While I don't use Google drive, Microsoft OneDrive, or DropBox, I run my own private NextCloud cloud drive. I use Gmail for my private email service and I use cloud-based software repositories. The cloud has benefits.
I shared my perspectives about sensitive data and data security under Confidentiality vs Privacy in my first comment. To recap, data security, aka confidentiality, is almost always a red herring in most discussions about MT. Most translators should be concerned with loss of competitive edge from intrusions on their personal privacy. No, I do not believe GDPR is worth its weight in toilet paper. Companies who know your private habits will use them to their competitive advantage. If you want privacy, don't use the services.
I'm not sure how you can come to the conclusion that I'm making an argument against MT from what I've written so far. So, I'll share that now. I'm against cloud-based MT services for professionals, but not because of quality or data security issues. I'm against them if and when the MT service's business models threatens a translator's competitive edge. I'm against online CAT tools for the same reasons. However, not all translators are at risk, but many are. In those cases, I believe translators need alternatives. That's why I develop and sell the world's only MT application for desktops with machine learning and artificial intelligence that enable translators to build their own engines on their own PCs without the Internet and without subscription or usage fees.
Back to data security, my program's only connection to the Internet occurs during installation when the system authenticates your license key with my server. My biggest customer is a government office with 40 translators. Their security policy prohibits any Internet connections. They ordered a special version of the installer that disables the license key validation. Confidentiality in that case is NOT a red herring, but those cases are few and far between.
By the way, I do not sell "MT" if by "MT" you mean charge for raw machine-translated segments. That's what all online MT services sell... crappy target segments. Then, they charge you $20 per million characters (or more) for the privilege of you fixing them. I prefer an old-fashioned (yet amazingly new) revenue model. I sell a one-time perpetual EULA. Customers own the license and use the software forever without paying usage fees. Pay once, use unlimited. Old fashioned!
Tom
[Edited at 2019-08-19 17:53 GMT]
| | | | Tom Hoar (X)
United States
Local time: 10:24
English
| Interesting rates... | Aug 19, 2019 |
Jo Macdonald wrote:
...haven’t so far because the rates offered just aren’t interesting to me as a pro translator.
So, use private MT software that your full-rate customers can't detect and deliver the same quality you're known for. You get full rates. You expand you capacity. You can back-fill the free time with new work at full rates. Your customers get what they pay for. Win-win.
[Edited at 2019-08-19 14:49 GMT]
| | | | Tom Hoar (X)
United States
Local time: 10:24
English
| Programmed hype... | Aug 19, 2019 |
Wow, Katalin!
What you call "programmed hype." I'd call "fake news." I agree with all of them except #5.
Adapting to changing technology is not necessary to live a happy, healthy, fufilling life. On the whole, however, it sure makes life easier. I don't see many of us using quill and inkwell now-a-days.
Tom
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7] > | There is no moderator assigned specifically to this forum. To report site rules violations or get help, please contact site staff » Who is not using MT today? | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
| | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
