More than a third of translators think they’ve already lost work to AI

[Anonymous No.23332061]

That’s according to a recently released survey by the Society of Authors, which heard from over 800 of their members about how they’re feeling about emergent technologies and their impact on their creative work.

The Society, a UK-based trade organization that has been advising and campaigning for writers, illustrators, and literary translators for over a century, found that its members are curious but extremely wary of new generative technology.

This isn’t a universally skeptical crowd: 22% of respondents say they have used generative programs in their work, and 31% have used them for brainstorming. This number was lower than I might have guessed. Artists have always embraced the experimental possibility of new materials and tools, and that so few are using AI underscores the deep and widespread ethical and reputational concerns around this tech. In fact, the survey found that “even those respondents who were more optimistic…reiterated that ethical concerns are a primary reason to avoid the use of generative AI systems at this stage.”

There’s also the crucial factor that this tech hasn’t shown an ability to make art that is good or interesting, and has only found a fanbase amongst the worst guys you’ve ever seen.

The survey also found that AI is already cutting into people’s work. A quarter of illustrators (26%) and over a third of translators (36%) say they’ve lost work due to generative AI, and a higher percentage—37% of illustrators and 43% of translators—say the income for their work has decreased because of generative tech. It seems like this programming is already working as intended.

https://lithub.com/more-than-a-third-of-translators-think-theyve-already-lost-work-to-ai/

[Anonymous No.23332086]

As far as I know, the vast majority of translators aren't working on anything even remotely resembling art
I used to be friends with someone who worked freelance translating church records

[Anonymous No.23332096]

>>23332061
AI in this area is primarily bullshit work like translating documents for businesses and illustrating power point presentations. No real loss. Only place in literature which AI will take over translation is in fad genre shit. Any author resorting to AI for illustration probably can not afford an illustrator and their work just would go without.
>>23332086
Few people make a living or much money with literary translations, its mostly college professors and the like doing it as a passion project. The handful of people who have managed to make a career out of literary translation are in no risk of AI taking their job and AI is still a long ways off from reaching their level.

[Anonymous No.23332102]

>>23332061
Geniuses like Max Lawton will be alright. Did you know he’s working on two new projects?

[Anonymous No.23332187]

>>23332061
Boiler plate copy translators are not REAL LITERARY translators. Fuck off shill before I find you.

[Anonymous No.23332210]

Monolingual chads unite

[Anonymous No.23332265]

If my experience generating subtitles is any indication, any machine translations will need a lot of editing before being considered usable. WhisperX may make a really good first draft, but its timestamp generation gets confused if the background audio is too loud, plus it has the usual problems with vocal effects and foreign accents.

[Anonymous No.23333107]

>>23332210
I KNEW it was a good idea to not learn a new language!