I'm writing this in English.
-
I'm writing this in English.
Do you, though? Your writing style was different in the past, so I am pretty sure that you now machine-translate, or perhaps use an LLM writing assistant.
To be honest, the non-slop version of you was much better.
-
I'm writing this in English.
Do you, though? Your writing style was different in the past, so I am pretty sure that you now machine-translate, or perhaps use an LLM writing assistant.
To be honest, the non-slop version of you was much better.
@silverpill@mitra.social Yes, I used an LLM to help write it. I wrote my thoughts in Korean first, then had it translated. That's kind of the whole point I was making.
I'm not a native English speaker. When I write long-form English on my own, it's slow and the result is often not what I actually meant. Using a tool to bridge that gap doesn't make the thoughts less mine. It makes them more accurately mine, not less. A non-native speaker hiring a copy editor wouldn't get this reaction.
I'll grant you that “the non-slop version of you” stings a little. But I'd rather be legible and called slop than be authentic and misread.
-
From back when I used to flip through a thick dictionary, taking a minute for each sentence, to now, when I use an LLM to write in English, people don't realize that I'm personally speaking to them in English for their sake. Honestly, I just want to speak in Korean. I hate English.
-
From back when I used to flip through a thick dictionary, taking a minute for each sentence, to now, when I use an LLM to write in English, people don't realize that I'm personally speaking to them in English for their sake. Honestly, I just want to speak in Korean. I hate English.
To be precise, it's not English as a language that I hate, but English as a form of power.
-
@hongminhee Authenticity matters. When I see slop I usually just ignore it, because reading it is like watching paint dry, and I think I am not alone in that.
You're basically the only person with whom I continue to communicate despite all of this. -
From back when I used to flip through a thick dictionary, taking a minute for each sentence, to now, when I use an LLM to write in English, people don't realize that I'm personally speaking to them in English for their sake. Honestly, I just want to speak in Korean. I hate English.
@hongminhee 저는 당신이 영어를 싫어하는지 몰랐습니다. 영어가 모국어라서 사람들이 제 필요에 맞춰주는 것에 익숙해져 있었습니다. 앞으로는 당신의 글을 한국어(아니면 일본어?)로 읽고, 저도 한국어로 답해 보겠습니다.
-
I'm writing this in English.
Do you, though? Your writing style was different in the past, so I am pretty sure that you now machine-translate, or perhaps use an LLM writing assistant.
To be honest, the non-slop version of you was much better.
I don’t interject this as an attack, but please realize that when you say “AI slop” you say “sloppy person who uses AI”.
@hongminhee very clearly is not such a person, so please don’t imply they are, even if they chose an assistant you disapprove of to help them communicate.
I am irritated by the term “AI slop” because it shifts the responsibility from the user to their tool, from the way they use the tool to something that’s inevitable.
-
@hongminhee @silverpill Hi. I'm curious (as a non-native english speaker on the other side of the argument), what gives you the confidence that machine translation won't be misread ?
I'd be way less secure about my criticism of MT if the tools were able to probe the author for meaning but we're not quite there, and I think that MT in the hands of a polyglot-ish author has better chances of being somewhat useful (at least it's a huge difference from unedited/unverified client-side translations). -
@hongminhee @Gargron I’m sympathetic with your position of being on the language fringe on the Internet, because English is so dominant. My mother tongue is French, and I had to learn English as part of the mandatory French education.
I still don’t share your partial defense of LLMs. Even anglophones will misconstrue each other’s argument and put words in each other’s mouth even though no machine translation was involved, no matter how up-to-date it would be.
Furthermore, you mention “the people [you’re] addressing”, which for me is key. I could have replied to you in French, and yet I didn’t, because I want you to understand what I’m saying, and I don’t have any evidence you’d better understand me in French than in English. So yes, as soon as you choose a specific audience to address, it falls on you to pick the most appropriate language, there’s no way around it.
Now if I wrote something in French and an anglophone started arguing with me over a poor machine-translated version of my text, it wouldn’t be my responsibility. The text would have been meant for a specific audience which they were obviously not a part of. The fact that it would be public doesn’t mean everybody in the world is entitled to a clear understanding of it, and it is neither your or my fault.
Machine translation has always been a crutch, useful but limited, and no technological progress will erase the inherent friction of publicly expressing yourself on the Internet, because this friction exists even among speakers of the same language.
-
@hongminhee @silverpill Hi. I'm curious (as a non-native english speaker on the other side of the argument), what gives you the confidence that machine translation won't be misread ?
I'd be way less secure about my criticism of MT if the tools were able to probe the author for meaning but we're not quite there, and I think that MT in the hands of a polyglot-ish author has better chances of being somewhat useful (at least it's a huge difference from unedited/unverified client-side translations).@hongminhee @silverpill I really think there could be a lot to do in terms of bridging the fluency gap in terms of UX. You refer to your experience flipping pages of dictionaries, and I relate to that quite hard : that's where I'd like to see effort and change in software.
However, I feel comfortable bearing the responsibility of making my speech accessible to an English or Spanish speaker that doesn't speak French, and any failure would be mine. -
@hongminhee@hollo.social I think your post makes me think more critically about the use of LLMs for translation services. It is easy for me to judge from a position of privilege because I am a native English speaker, and I do not realize the access I am given simply because of it.
While reading your post it also made me think about the sacrifices you made to contribute to this community. There are precious few people in the Asia-Pacific region who regularly contribute to AP development, and a large part of that is the language barrier.
If LLM-translation makes the AP development community less euro-america-centric, then I am all for it. Cultural differences we can work through, but language barriers are harder to bypass!
Aside, congratulations for making it onto Hacker News front page :)
-
@hongminhee @silverpill I really think there could be a lot to do in terms of bridging the fluency gap in terms of UX. You refer to your experience flipping pages of dictionaries, and I relate to that quite hard : that's where I'd like to see effort and change in software.
However, I feel comfortable bearing the responsibility of making my speech accessible to an English or Spanish speaker that doesn't speak French, and any failure would be mine.@ddelemeny@mastodon.xyz @silverpill@mitra.social The confidence comes from an asymmetry I suspect many non-native speakers will recognize: I can read English much better than I can write it.
When I write in English on my own, I often know, as I'm writing, that something is off—that the sentence doesn't carry the weight I intended, or that the nuance I wanted is somewhere between the words I've chosen. I just don't always know how to fix it. When I write in Korean first and then work with an LLM, I can read the result and check it against what I meant. Sometimes I'll see a phrase and think: yes, exactly that, I didn't know how to get there myself. That moment of recognition is the verification step.
So I'm not trusting the machine blindly. I'm using my reading ability—which is reasonably good—to audit an output that my writing ability couldn't have produced alone. It's an imperfect process, but it's not as unmoored as handing a text to a system and walking away.
Your point about polyglot authors is well taken. The tool works better when the person using it can actually evaluate what it produces. I'd agree that's a meaningful distinction.
-
@hongminhee @silverpill I see. One personal reason I don't want to rely on translators and prefer the "hard" way, is that I believe my reading and understanding is sharpened by my attempts at writing. That's the essence of the "immersion in a language" argument for me, and I have experienced it several times (positively by being immersed in English and Spanish speaking cultures, and negatively by lack of it in German and Korean). Do you relate to that ?
-
@hongminhee @silverpill I see. One personal reason I don't want to rely on translators and prefer the "hard" way, is that I believe my reading and understanding is sharpened by my attempts at writing. That's the essence of the "immersion in a language" argument for me, and I have experienced it several times (positively by being immersed in English and Spanish speaking cultures, and negatively by lack of it in German and Korean). Do you relate to that ?
@hongminhee @silverpill How do you think translators shape or maintain your abilities in a foreign language, as opposed to research and experimentation ?
-
@julian@activitypub.space Thank you for saying this. The ActivityPub development community being Euro-America-centric isn't just a cultural observation. It shapes what gets built, what use cases are considered, and whose needs are treated as edge cases. Language is a big part of that, and I'm glad the point landed.
And yes, apparently the chardet post found its audience. I was not expecting that particular piece to take off, but I'll take it!
-
@hongminhee@hollo.social do you think your writing skills will improve with continued reading of the LLM-reflected translations, to the point where you may no longer need it?
-
undefined hongminhee@hollo.social shared this topic
-
@hongminhee @silverpill Maybe consider writing posts in both languages, Korean and English. Multi-language posting on the protocol side is in its early infancy and basically does not exist, but you at least don't seem to have the arbitrary character limit on posts that a certain blue elephant has. It might not be a bad idea to take advantage of that. Even if the english part is slightly broken, there is still the possibility of defaulting to a translation.
Not sure how that would hold up in reality, but it seems like a reasonable option to me, even though translators in $current_year are getting worse instead of better in general. Google Translate is barely usable now. -
@hongminhee @silverpill How do you think translators shape or maintain your abilities in a foreign language, as opposed to research and experimentation ?
@ddelemeny@mastodon.xyz @silverpill@mitra.social I relate to the immersion argument, and I think it's part of why I avoided machine translation for so long—not out of principle, but because the output wasn't worth learning from. Older MT between Korean and English produced something closer to a word-by-word skeleton than actual language. You couldn't look at it and think: oh, that's how a native speaker would put it. It was more like a scaffold you had to tear down before building anything.
LLMs are different enough that I've had to revise that instinct. The output is often genuinely idiomatic, and when I read a phrase that lands exactly right, there's a recognition that functions a lot like learning—the same feeling as encountering a sentence in a book and thinking: I'll remember that. I do find myself absorbing expressions that way, probably more than I would have expected.
That said, I think your point holds at the edges. For shorter writing I still work without assistance, partly for practical reasons and partly because I notice the difference when I don't. So I suspect I'm arriving at something similar to what you're describing, just from the other direction—using the tool for longer texts while trying to keep the muscle from atrophying entirely on shorter ones.
The dynamic you mention with German and Korean is interesting too. Korean was my concern about English; I imagine the lack of immersion shapes the experience in ways that are hard to compensate for with tools alone.
-
I don’t interject this as an attack, but please realize that when you say “AI slop” you say “sloppy person who uses AI”.
@hongminhee very clearly is not such a person, so please don’t imply they are, even if they chose an assistant you disapprove of to help them communicate.
I am irritated by the term “AI slop” because it shifts the responsibility from the user to their tool, from the way they use the tool to something that’s inevitable.
@lain_7 It would be the case if these tools weren't aggressively integrated in everything we use. If there's a murky water tap in your city, then it's up to the users to appropriately filter the output for safe consumption. Now if the murky water tap is forcibly installed in every household because the city received bribes for it, then the responsibility shifts from individual users to the murky water tap provider. Even if users can get somewhat safe water from adequate filtration. -
@julian@activitypub.space I actually just addressed something close to this in a reply up the thread—might be worth a read!