10 ms·
Judge says ‘literal but nonsensical’ Google translation isn’t consent for search
- _emacsomancer_ 8y agoWasn't there also some counter-terrorism case involving Google translation of something posted on Facebook?
- DerekL 8y ago“Facebook Apologizes After Translation of 'Good Morning' Post Sees Palestinian Arrested by Israeli Police” http://www.newsweek.com/palestinian-arrested-israel-police-after-facebook-mistranslation-692464 http://www.newsweek.com/palestinian-arrested-israel-police-a...
- fenollp 8y agoI hope it's the last Terry Gilliam movie that's ever becoming true! (Brazil, 1985)
- cobbzilla 8y agoWow, how terrifying. Is this English-speaking privilege rearing its ugly head again? Re the Terry Gilliam film Brazil: yes indeed, we have arrived. But somehow it's much more than that - we are becoming a mashup of Brazil + Brave New World. We've created colossal world bureaucracies (both government and corporate) writing and enforcing countless rules. But simultaneously, because of of perceived individual benefits offered by these bureaucracies, we have eagerly embraced a misplaced complacent acceptance of all these new rules. Boggles the mind. In our brave new world, maybe ignorance truly is bliss.
- _emacsomancer_ 8y agoThough I suppose Facebook uses Bing rather than Google translate.
- kiallmacinnes 8y agoI would be very curious to know exactly what the English sentence was. I've found that, unless you use perfect English (assuming the source language is English) and no slang, Google translate will fail miserably. Is this a case of really bad translation, or really bad English? The article doesn't give enough info to know!
- tantalor 8y agoThe article implies the original phrase: Can I search the car? Google translates: puedo buscar el auto This translates back to English: I can get the car?
- shkkmo 8y agoUsing google translate well is a skill in itself, you have to be explicit, use simpler words / grammar and avoid implicit, figurative or ambigous meanings. "Can I search the inside of your car?" translates quite well back and forth because the implicit meanings have been made explicit.
- kiallmacinnes 8y agoRight, this is what I was getting at, but you explained it better :)
- lazzlazzlazz 8y ago"Can I search the car?" in Google Translate yields "¿Puedo buscar el auto?", which is the phrase specified in the article. It's a case of bad translation, although as a bilingual speaker of English and Spanish, I think it's clear what the officer meant. (Better verbs would've been "registrar" or even "examinar".) I agree that "¿Puedo buscar el auto?" sounds like "Can I find the car?"
- posterboy 8y agoIt's a case of weird input language, alright. When I'm searching my phone, I'm looking for it. When I find my phone, then that's the moment I found it. When I am finding my phone, then that's a very optimistic way of phrasing that I will find it. Whereas, when I browse my phone, I am looking, or searching for something else through the use of my phone. Hence German "durchsuchen" -- search through. English can be an analytic language, so there's a difference, but you might as well say the situation could be analyzed to find the intent of the policemen at the latest when they actually started rifling through the car. At which point I wonder whether there was any protest against the examination. As an aside, ironically, google with search being their main claim to fame could not translate this any differently. Also, I got a punny answer when asking someone to look at my stuff, as I wanted to leave it at the bus stop while going into a shop: "Yes, it looks nice".
- magissima 8y agoEven if the translation were perfect, the cops absolutely should not have used it without being able to verify it.
- shalmanese 8y agoHow do the police not have an official Spanish translation of the Miranda rights not laminated onto a card and stored as a MP3 file on all of their phones?
- mattmanser 8y agoThey had to ask to search the car because they had no probable cause, not read him his miranda rights. You might as well ask why didn't they train them to speak Spanish.
- kccqzy 8y agoWhy would a cop use a recording of Miranda rights when they want to search? It's not like they are already arresting him.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- mikece 8y agoAt the very least the cop could have called an interpreter, put them on speakerphone, and conducted the conversation that way. I'm surprised law enforcement doesn't have these services, especially for Spanish. Does raise the question: if a law enforcement office pulls over someone with whom they are unable to communicate, what is the protocol?
- newacct500 8y agoTypically they will attempt to communicate with body language; i.e. administer a beating until their interlocutor gets the point.
- vermontdevil 8y agoCan confirm. It has happened to deaf people at times.
- mcguire 8y ago"Typically"?
- ubernostrum 8y agoIt was perhaps a bit sensationally presented, but the other commenter hits on an unfortunate truth: too often, inability to communicate is treated as noncompliance, and the standard response to perceived noncompliance is violence. For example, in Oklahoma City last year, police shot and killed a deaf man, despite being told he was deaf, because he wasn't able to hear what they were yelling to him: https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/09/21/552527929/oklahoma-city-police-fatally-shoot-deaf-man-despite-yells-of-he-cant-hear-you https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/09/21/552527929...
- oftenwrong 8y agoOr this other case where an old Indian man was slammed on the ground, leaving him partially paralyzed. https://youtu.be/JsAXgABK5BU https://youtu.be/JsAXgABK5BU
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- qahv66 8y agoName of the judge: Carlos Murguia.
- sathackr 8y agoCan anyone more familiar with the law explain why the good-faith exception[1] wouldn't apply here? [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/good_faith_exception_to_exclusionary_rule https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/good_faith_exception_to_excl...
- rhino369 8y agoThe ruling addresses that on pages 9-11. The court noted that in a pretty similar case (the same google translate error), a different did apply the good-faith exception. But the court distinguished this case from the other based on several factors. This cop didn't ask in english or point to the trunk. And the cop admitted he had other options other than google translate. It's a close call. I think it probably should apply, but I see the other side.
- crooked-v 8y agoI find it pretty horrifying that attempting to use Google Translate for routine police actions could ever be considered "good faith".
- magoghm 8y agoRelevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6D1YI-41ao https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G6D1YI-41ao (My hovercraft is full of eels)
- hisnameismanuel 8y agoI am bilingual and spend a lot of time interacting with people who are not. ‘Buscar el auto’ Means, literally ‘To look for the car’. The question ‘Puedo buscar el auto’ means ‘can I look for the car.’ As an English speaker you might see that it’s possible to understand this as ‘search the car’. Wrong. In Spanish, if you ask this question… … (and this is key) … … the car cannot be present. If you are to ‘buscar el auto’, it means a) There is a car that is familiar to you b) It is somewhere, but you don’t know where it is. The article’s use of ‘find’ was close but it missed the mark. ‘Look for’ is the most accurate translation. A Spanish speaker at this point would have NO idea what the policeman is trying to say. (‘What is this car you’re talking about? Why are you asking me if you can look for the car?') Moreso, a Spanish speaker with no understanding of how English works would simply not make the link from ‘buscar’ to ‘registrar’ (which is the word the policeman SHOULD have used) even despite the policeman being present and car searches being a normal thing. The two words are just too far off. The reason he's saying 'Si' is because this is what one does in Spanish to jog along a conversation where one a) Is not following b) Doesn't think there is any hope of asking for clarification without making the conversation even more difficult.
- cwp 8y agoYup, spot on. The meaning of "buscar" is really narrow, "discover the location of a thing", so even if the officer pointed at the car while saying "puedo buscar el auto", the only reasonable response would have been, "Huh? It's right here!"
- StavrosK 8y agoBasically, "can I look for the car?". "What do you mean look for it? It's right here!"
- lostlogin 8y agoI regularly interact with people who speak no English in healthcare. It’s amazing how confused a situation can get and how far a conversation can apparently progress with someone saying ‘yes’ in answer to a question that isn’t understood. It’s a trap for the unwary. Getting in the habit of phrasing questions such that ‘yes’ or ‘no’ are not the answer is a good habit in this setting, but it’s a slow way of having a conversation.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 8y agoI fear that Machine Learning/AI is falling into the uncanny valley, where you can depend on it most of the time, but it will let you down at very critical times and you have no way of knowing when that is. Here is a case with machine translation. The Tesla autopilot death is another example. Machine learning has been hyped so much recently, that I fear that with more cases like this, the public will become disillusioned and we will have another AI winter.
- lostlogin 8y agoThat implies there has been a summer. I’d be happy with an ok spring at this point.
- ktosobcy 8y agoOther curious thing: given the location wouldn't it be prudent to have some basic Spanish classes for public officials? It's not that hard to get the basics and it would really help communicating…
- kurthr 8y agoIt does not seem that understanding is the goal here, misunderstanding is the goal. Education and compassion are not helpful towards the end of harrassment.
- azborder 8y agoHarassment? The guy was a drug dealer with a lot of drugs in his car, and they tried to ask him if they could search his car. I’d say that’s about as far from harassment as it gets.
- Doxin 8y ago> a lot of drugs in his car Isn't that something you'd only discover after searching the car? Car searches need to be valid before executing them, not after. > they tried to ask him if they could search his car. They tried, failed, and then searched his car regardless.
- test6554 8y agoWhen they searched his car, with his consent, they found quite a stash of meth and cocaine. I get that they might have to let him go due to the 4th amendment violation, but I also think that he should be given probation or rehab or something. Just because the criminal portion has ended doesn't mean the public health/safety angle needs to be ignored.
- dragonwriter 8y ago> When they searched his car, with his consent Without his consent. > but I also think that he should be given probation or rehab or something. “Given” how? Except with due process—including findings based on legally obtained evidence—the government can't “give” him any mandate depriving him of liberty.
- larkeith 8y agoSetting such a precedent would make an utter mockery of the 4th amendment.
- scotty79 8y agoIgnoring solid evidence just because it was acquired illegally is mockery of justice, logic and common sense. If it was collected illegally then punish the person that did the illegal thing but do not discard the evidence.
- chatmasta 8y ago> mockery of justice The “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” doctrine [0] would disagree with you. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_of_the_poisonous_tree
- scotty79 8y agoI know it's how things are in US. Some stupid thing someone came up with in 1920 stuck there. Not sure if any other country on the planet has such a silly rule. If evidence is false or tampered with then by all means ignore it, but if it's solid it doesn't matter if it came out just because someone committed some additional crime.
- Proven 8y agoFreaking nonsense... if you are familiar with the constitution you'd know your rights before the cops tried to explain them to you.
- 8bitsrule 8y agoGoogle translates about as well as self-driving cars drive.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- childintime 8y agoWell, any time I need something from a gov and it isn't in the language it wants to see, it just closes shop on me. Even if the language is english and everybody understands it, except the official, who is "just following the law". So we have to go to an official translator, pay through the nose to get something trivial done. Or forget it. Is the court suggesting, with this verdict, the cops do the same? Seems like a reversal of the usual gov policy to me. Furthermore, in this situation non-verbal communications take over and should be considered. If the defendant knew the law he would have signalled "no" (while saying "no"), or positioned himself as to block access (if possible).
- fareesh 8y agoI didn't understand the bit about being fortunate to live in a multilingual society Here in India we have so many languages, I don't consider myself to be more fortunate than people in other societies because of this fact. If anything, I see it as a potentially massive inconvenience. It has been the root of so much conflict between communities. Entire states have been split into two because of language issues. Feels like diversity has an exaggerated sense of value in the west. Probably not a politically correct thing to say given the obsession with race.
- cirgue 8y agoI don’t think that most people would take issue with the idea that diversity with no basis for common experience/understanding is a bad thing. The point of diversity as a social value in the West is the belief that by explicitly incentivizing more interaction between people of different backgrounds, barriers to communication erode and eventually disappear, or at least are minimal enough that everyone can participate in a society as equals. Edit: more succinctly, the emphasis on diversity in the West is intended to eventually solve the very real problem that you identify.