525
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2026
525 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
85809 readers
3072 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Actually lets break it down, so it is clearer what the accuracy was. I will not talk about the mistranslations, though.
I have come to the same conclusion as the previous poster. DeepL identifies correctly I agree with them, but fails to pick up the nuance of it. Pretty good.
I am indirectly taking part in mocking techbros for thinking AI has solved language learning. This is referencing the previous post, so DeepL could not know that without context. It somewhat picks up I am saying AI-stuff has not solved anything.
It correctly picks up I learned something about language yesterday and that someone fails at it, but it fails to identify I am talking specifically about dialects and fails to clearly convey it is AI that fails. It translates correctly I mistakenly thought the previous thing was true.
I am saying AI could not properly answer to talking in dialect, referencing indirectly I am talking in dialect in the message. DeepL picks up that I am saying something is failing, but does not convey anything else correctly.
I'm telling Google was the worst at translating, and that I found that hilarious. DeepL fully fails to translate the meaning, but translates the word "shit" acceptably, and conveys correctly something is funny.
So what was lost in translation?
Talking in dialect, and AI failing to translate dialects properly - Core part of the message, so really bad, that it was about dialects, was not conveyed.
I am laughing at Googles translation abilities being the worst - Fails to convey this completely. Not a core part of the message, but still relatively important information.
Nuance about thinking before agreeing - Leaving that out does not matter in casual conversation. If this was translation for a more "proper" thing, this could be bad though.
Mocking techbros - This required context that wasn't offered.
Okay, so it was in dialect. I honestly would not have expected translation programs to be able to do that at all. Or are Finnish dialects actually written language? In German they aren't, but there are books written in a phonetical way in dialect, so there may be something for the AI to reference.
No, they are not usually written except people sometimes doing it casually in social media, but because our lettering system is almost fully phonetic, it is very easy to write and read them if you just speak finnish. Also if you are native speaker, you kind of learn the certain fluidity in the core of the language, so you can pretty much understand the words even if they vary a lot (except people from Rauma, nobody understands them).
I really thought it would have been cracked by AI because it can translate finnish pretty accurately (not always...) and if you can do that dialects aren't hard at all, but I was surprised to find that it still cannot! I am assuming it really is just because there are not enough written sources to teach from.
//Oh, and as a summary my main points were, that AI most definitely has not "solved" learning and translating languages as it yet cannot even translate a lot of things, and I guess also, that you cannot trust AI translations if the text translated is some obscure language you do not know. They can sound convincing and form coherent sentences, but the meaning can be fully incorrect.