Its obvious mozilla doesnt care and wont listen or change by that single, stupid comment. AI response or an idiot human, either way what an insult of a comment. Everything was clearly listed out! Just read what was written! Reach out privatley!
Mozilla turned on shitty AI no one wants without talking to anyone and now wont stop it when its breaking everything and instead just publicly placate.
Not even an apology but a fucking insult!!!
"sorry for your feelings"
They can feel however they want you fuckup how about you say sorry for fucking up all the hard work with your shitty product pushes no one wants
After this, the common ground can only be that they translate something else. Overriding human translations for some crap done with LLM that is obviously inferior... are they ok?
They had specific complaints. Either say, "we're willing to work to change the things that you're complaining about", or say, "sorry, we're not going to change those things". The wishy washy bullshit they did is effectively ignoring the guy. They're ignoring everything the person said. And it definitely comes across as "sorry not sorry" corporate bullshit.
The standard for fixing something this broken is stop the bot, revert the rollout, revert changes to pages affected, then attempt to figure out what went wrong. Even if you haven't done it yet, announce the revert steps, FFS.
Revert the changes and then hop on a call to figure out how to do it right next time.
"Explain what's wrong and how to fix it" is the wrong approach. if you need it explained to you what was broken, then you're not the expert here, just the local tinpot dictator.
Not like a dick like he did. No lets jump into a quick call while ignoring everything OP said. It's clear a quick call will not solve this. Turn off the AI roll back all the shit it caused is the bare minimum.
Are you saying they were hard to understand or badly written? Because to me they seem to be crystal clear explanation of issues. I also did not concluded that the leaving person is "struggling" or generally need help.
Given that the bug is a well-known and inherent flaw of the technology used, I don't understand what good this would do. It's not enough to say "whoops, we didn't think the machine would do the thing the machine is known to do".
To fix the bug the architecture of the feature would have to be different, and that was completely obvious from the start.
Some grievances were vague. It doesn't follow our translation guidelines. What specific guidelines did it not follow? It doesn't respect current localization for Japanese users, so they were lost. What was not localized?
Mozilla's response should not be limited to clarifying these grievances. But it could have been all the staff member who responded could do.
Yes, that's why you engage with the people doing the work first and run it on a staging environment to see what would be overwritten. You test until it's working well enough to enhance the effort done by the translators.
Well, in this era Im not entirely sure the quality aspect is even considered. CEO wants AI? Then he will get it, so that the next earnings call can be bombastic!
Saving zero dollars and making the product worse is not important, only that there doesn’t seem to be a browser monopoly is.
What, you mean that US companies should ask their local branches before pushing changes in every countries? /s
This happens all the time, in every US company I know. It's as if the Americans where entirely oblivious to the fact that the rest of the world exists.
It might be more helpful to point out which guidelines it did follow. Humans are expected to read and obey these things - so presumably whoever deployed them will be aware and can demonstrate that they were followed.
Interestingly, it looks like some of the "bad examples" are precisely the kind of things ML would produce. Others are what non-native speakers would produce (starting with "あなたは" to translate a sentence starting by "you").
I'm sure some translators were using ML before it was integrated, and those guidelines are here in particular to tell them about those problems.
Also, ML is now really good to translate between European languages, but Japanese is very different in its structure so ML from English to Japanese is not as good. I'm sure some people who only know English/French/Spanish/German saw that ML is pretty good, and don't realize that for some other language it just doesn't work.
> Also, ML is now really good to translate between European languages
As somebody who has to regularly bear "German" machine-translated UIs and manuals that originate in English, I can only say: No, it's not. It's atrocious.
I have your answer: you provide a tool for your translators, you don't unleash a bot that makes changes left and right and creates new pages.
Typically, when a new page is written in English, don't automatically generate a version in all languages. When a translator starts creating the page in their language, provide a button to pre-fill with ML translation if they want to.
And for users, you can display the English version with a message, "this is not translated in your language yet but you can read an ML version if you want".
Do you expect someone who has just watched a bot replace 20 years of their work, with no prior consultation or review, to now write a detailed post about how translations by the bot are not specifically wrong?
The core issue here is the way the bot was deployed. The fact that they had the poor taste to make it auto-replace articles written by their own volunteers is idiotic and disrespectful in the extreme. A new bot should work entirely in the back end, sending proposals for translations to the volunteers, who can choose to accept them or ignore them. Once the rate of acceptance is very high, for a specific individual language, then you might consider automating further.
And yes, this effort needs to be done for each language separately. Just because the bot works well in Italian doesn't in any way guarantee that it will work well in Japanese. Machine translation quality varies wildly by language, this is a well known and obvious fact.
I don't know why you're being downvoted, you're exactly right.
The person replying is probably not an expert in this. But they want to get more details so they can figure out how to get it to the right people with more information.
> Same reason people here are taking "let's jump on a call" as some personal attack.
Some people just like drama.
No, some of us can see into the future, because it flows from the past. When management shits on 20 years of work and breaks everything after not listening to your warnings, they don't suddenly start listening and understanding out of nowhere.
The market fit of your words matter and the non apology "sorry you feel that way" doesn't help. It's one of those gnarly phrases that only get used if you feel the need to act but in reality don't want to. Maybe the person is sincere his words are tainted by the overuse in shady corp responses. If you are engaging with your community you need to know this otherwise you'll always look like a clown.
Or maybe it was just a poorly thought out piece of software that will get rolled back?
Saying "the entire power structure is wrong from the get go" is a huge conclusion to draw here. People write internal tools and make mistakes. Mistakes can be fixed.
I wonder if you and the person who replied really understands how you feel when you have been part of something over 20 years and see it destroyed by tone deaf changes to text. I have no idea how Sumobot works, but it is easy to see how Mozilla or an organization with top down "ship-it-fast" incentives can trample a community led project. This is really not a question of AI, the same thing happens with professional translators.
> We want to make sure we trully understand what you're struggling with.
The post literally starts with a list of grievances. Maybe ask the AI for an executive summary and the key points.