3 ms·
The question was whether jobs are being lost due to AI, not whether translations are fully automated. If translations would support the same amount of jobs in t
by layer8 10mo ago
The question was whether jobs are being lost due to AI, not whether translations are fully automated. If translations would support the same amount of jobs in translation review as previously for human translation themselves, companies wouldn’t save money by using AI for translation. But that’s not what’s happened: pricing has fallen dramatically for human translation, because AI makes it cheaper, and the fallen prices mean that many translators couldn’t make a living from it anymore.
- satvikpendem 10mo agoWhere does it show that jobs have actually been lost? That is the part I am skeptical about. The roles of my translator acquaintances were shifted to review, not lost wholesale.
- frm88 10mo agoIn fact, for each 1 percentage point increase in MT usage, translator employment growth dropped by approximately 0.7 percentage points. Cumulatively, this effect translates into an estimated loss of about 28,000 new translator positions that might otherwise have been created over the 2010–2023 period. https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/lost-translation-ais-impact-translators-and-foreign-language-skills https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/lost-translation-ais-impact-t...
- satvikpendem 10mo agoTalking about jobs that "might have been" created is disingenuous, the same as saying pirates "steal" copies they "might have" otherwise paid for. Even setting that aside, are there any confounding factors in that report? That would be my primary question because for many other industries, companies are using AI as the excuse, not the actual reason, to lay people off.