Slashdot Mirror


Computer Translator Ready for Testing in Iraq

cgibby98 wrote to mention a Wired News story about a battle-zone translation technology that may allow near real-time conversations between English and Arabic speakers. From the article: "Funded by Darpa, the system would allow troops to communicate in Arabic through a laptop computer equipped with voice recognition and translation software. Troops could speak in English and have their words instantly translated into Iraqi Arabic, 'spoken' by a computerized man's voice. The program also translates Arabic into English. Will it replace the need for an interpreter when you're having some sort of high-level conversation? Absolutely not. But it is absolutely to the point where it could be useful in some carefully chosen situations."

350 comments

  1. Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    But will it report when the interrogation turns to illegal torture, like a live human might?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Silent Translator by Tackhead · · Score: 3, Funny
      > But will it report when the interrogation turns to illegal torture, like a live human might [democracynow.org]?

      I swear! I swear to you, I was only asking him if his hovercraft was full of eels! Stop fondling my buttocks!

    2. Re:Silent Translator by fishybell · · Score: 2, Funny
      No, but it might make for akward situations:

      Soldier: I said "where are the bombs?"

      Prisoner: I told you! I only have one Mom!

      Wash, rinse, repeat.

      --
      ><));>
    3. Re:Silent Translator by Hymer · · Score: 1

      "But will it report when the interrogation turns to illegal torture"
      It would not be an "improvment" if it did... would it ?

    4. Re:Silent Translator by TheRealFritz · · Score: 1

      That might prove more difficult, since torture is a fine line and requires not just literal interpretation of the verbage but actually human-like understanding of the interaction (social understanding). It could lighten the mood, though, with the occasional glitch that inserts some hilarity.

    5. Re:Silent Translator by zxnos · · Score: 3, Funny

      no, its a balm like an ointment...

      --
      always mosh clockwise
    6. Re:Silent Translator by cayenne8 · · Score: 0
      English: "Put your weapon down"

      Arabic translation: "Would you like to come upstairs with me...bouncy, bouncy..."

      --with apologies to the Pythons

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    7. Re:Silent Translator by fishybell · · Score: 2, Informative
      Soldier: Get down on the floor!!! Everyone runs out of the door and gets shot. Doesn't sound too funny to me.

      Shit like this has to work in an environment where life and death decisions are made based on the perceived the quality of a translation. Hilarious glitches won't lighten the mood unless you're a true sadist.

      --
      ><));>
    8. Re:Silent Translator by ZeroExistenZ · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      heh, and does it detect *global disapproved* chemical warfare?(, which they eventually couldn't deny any longer and admitted)

      --
      I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
    9. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1, Insightful

      I ask whether a machine without a conscience is a suitable replacement for a human translator, in an extremely important current situation where precisely that conscience is necessary. Then I get TrollMod'ed:

      Moderation -2
          50% Troll
          50% Flamebait

      We need to talk about the consequences of automating humans out of extremely important human transactions. The TrollMods who fear that American torture revealed will hurt their favorite torturers are already robots, so eliminating them from the transactions will only improve them. If you were still human, you should be ashamed of your diligence in torturing actual humans, and defending the machines.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    10. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Do you think continuing to torture people is an improvement?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    11. Re:Silent Translator by P3NIS_CLEAVER · · Score: 0

      How about some mod points here?

      --
      Please sign petition to restore sanity to our banking system!!!

      http://financialpetition.org/
    12. Re:Silent Translator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Insightful??? seems like a politically charged moderation to me. How about "off-topic" or "flamebait" instead?

    13. Re:Silent Translator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If hooking up a couple terrorists' nether regions to a car battery will help prevent attacks, catch more terrorists, or otherwise be useful to our side, then I've only got one thing to say: Black's negative, red's positive.

      INTER ARMA ENIM SILENT LEGES

    14. Re:Silent Translator by ocelotbob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      of course, you, being one who looks through the world in shit-tinted glasses, fails to see situations where that same "sterile" translation can prove a good double check against translators who may have ulterior motives. This can be a very, very useful double check, or a useful in hot situations where there are no nearby translators. Would you rather have people shooting it out, or maybe trying to establish some degree of communication?

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    15. Re:Silent Translator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My friend- Speaking of translation-
      It is about words. Calling putting panties on heads "torture" like the NY times has done dillutes the word torture. Then when real torture happens, people think- hmm- I wonder if they were just putting panties on heads again...
      What do you mean by torture? Do you mean what the islamofascists do when they chop heads off, or American "torture" which includes making people get naked and threatening them?
      Although I respect your opinion- I don't take you seriously, as I spent time in the middle east. My opinion of Iraq doesn't come from CNN and various liberal groups. I am what you might call a "primary source" if we were writing a research paper....

    16. Re:Silent Translator by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      Don't even bother... It's like trying to educate a retarded dog.

      --
      Fuck it
    17. Re:Silent Translator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh come on! If you can't realize a Python (Monty) reference, don't bother moderating posts! Jeez.

    18. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      How do you know they're a terrorist until after you torture them? If you read the interview to which I linked, you'd see that the people we're torturing aren't terrorists. That's the basis for American justice. It's not just some way to "be nice to everyone". It's a way to serve justice without torturing innocent people. Torture which is especially counterproductive when fighting a Terror War, which is mostly a propaganda war for public opinion and cooperation.

      Face it, Anonymous Coward - all you've got to say is "I like torture", and "terrorism" is just your sloppy excuse to indulge your sadism. You're in large, but not good, company.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    19. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Of course you are a fucking sadist, hellbent on torture at any excuse. Because I didn't say machine translation isn't useful, or that we shouldn't use it when there are no human translators. All I said - a question, in fact - was whether it was a good idea to replace humans. Instead of your convenient hypothetical example which you made up. So fuck you and your torture lust, and your attacks on people who will even raise the possibility that eliminating people with a conscience will reduce torture. You torture loving animal.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    20. Re:Silent Translator by Sj0 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You know, Syria exists for a reason -- for assholes like you to go move there and feel safe from terrorists. Go ahead -- we're watching!

      --
      It's been a long time.
    21. Re:Silent Translator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Arabic translation: "Would you like to come upstairs with me...bouncy, bouncy..."

      Corrected Arabic translation: "Durka durka! Durka durka JIHAD durka durka!"
    22. Re:Silent Translator by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      Wow, such anger, such hatred, such rage. Such kneejerk reactionaryism. You're hellbent on saying "ZOMG, this will increase torture" instead of thinking, "hey, wait, this can stop incidents as well". I don't agree with torture, where did I ever say "we should beat the shit out of those shit-colored ragheads"? You do a lot of fancy jumping to conclusion.

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    23. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Why refer to mere mockery as torture, when we're talking about beating people for weeks, burning them, biting them with dogs, and all the other undeniable torture referred to just in the interview with a translator to which I linked? Since you're all for torture, doesn't that make you as despicable as the "islamofascists" (American fascist codeword) you refer to? And is your "primary source" claim a confession that you torture people, Anonymous Coward? That's a pretty good reason to invent strawmen to smokescreen the actual torture that you conveniently ignore.

      FWIW, I've also spent time in the Mideast, and I live in NYC. Where we're not exactly "nice", especially to people who bombed our city. But where we deal with actual reality enough to know that torturing Iraqis we pick up to produce higher "captured Islamofascists" numbers is 1: torturing totally innocent people; 2: thereby equating Americans with Saddam Hussein, destroying our war effort's only possible redeeming feature; 3: not producing any useful intelligence, certainly not in any measure that can't be produced otherwise, and which is completely drowned out by the destruction we're creating as torturers.

      All that is obvious to any sane adult. The only people taking your line, Anonymous torture apologist Coward, are people who want to torture, rationality be damned.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    24. Re:Silent Translator by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      I see, you've been to the middle east, so you're an authoritative source on torture, eh?

      I guess, living in Canada, that makes me an authoritative source on baby seal farming, doesn't it?

      Well, I've got to tell you, I don't see what those liberal half-wits have a problem with! All you do is plant the baby seals in the ground, water them for six to eight months, and then whack 'em with a club to get them off the vine.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    25. Re:Silent Translator by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      I bet if you beat the dog with a broom handle then sodomized it with it, you'd get a better response to your efforts.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    26. Re:Silent Translator by Minwee · · Score: 1

      It's a lip bomb! Take cover!

    27. Re:Silent Translator by Alex+P+Keaton+in+da · · Score: 1

      Um- If someone came on slashdot and started making comments about operating systems, and they had never used a computer, and only knew about computers from some slanted website, we would ridicule them. That is pretty much how I feel about you, who has never served (I can tell from your posts), commenting on what goes on in the military. Make sense?

      --
      And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
    28. Re:Silent Translator by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1

      Well, judging by that articles you linked, no and maybe.

      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
    29. Re:Silent Translator by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      ok, weirdo

      --
      Fuck it
    30. Re:Silent Translator by ncc74656 · · Score: 1
      Do you think continuing to torture people is an improvement?

      In order for something to continue, it must first have occurred at some point. Your premise is flawed; it would be like my asking you if you have stopped beating your wife.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    31. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      You obnoxious rightwing parrot asshole, of course I'm angry at American torture, and scumbags like you who love it. If you weren't already a zombie, you'd be angry about it, too. You foully insult me and my perfectly polite post, and then call me more names when I call you out. If you'd merely replied to my question with the legitimate point that it's better than nothing, we could talk about that. But that point is just your cover for promoting torture while simultaneously denying it, and attacking me for merely talking about torture in public. You fucking batshit fascist.

        Where did you ever say something revealing you're a tortureloving bigot? Right in your post, you insane sadistic fuckhead. All I'm jumping on is your sorry ass for spewing such deranged insanity as if no one will notice. You sick slave to violence.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    32. Re:Silent Translator by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      So you don't actually get a reference to the thing you were just referring to?

      Perhaps the retarded dog here is not who it first appears to be?

      --
      It's been a long time.
    33. Re:Silent Translator by Foobar+of+Borg · · Score: 1

      Kind of like your president, right? He seems perfectly happy to babble on and on about warfare and the enemy and what it takes to eliminate terrorism, but he didn't serve when he had the chance either. Make sense?

    34. Re:Silent Translator by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      lol

      --
      Fuck it
    35. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I pointed to an interview from an Iraq veteran who points out how widespread and sickeining is torture by American military there. By your logic, aren't you unfit to comment on his eyewitness participation?

      Of course you're not. I'm expert in machine translation, and its effect on human transactions, so I am more than qualified to even just ask a relevant question. But even more so, I'm an American citizen. Those who serve in the military are serving me and my fellow citizens. Their behavior is of course subject to question by me. Or don't you understand democracy? And those soldiers, especially people abused into further abuse like the translator to whom I referred, are themselves entitled to their civilian leaders considering these contributing factors that enable torture. Aren't you upset that the people creating these policies executing torture haven't served in the military, yet daily put soldiers into both harm and crime? I thought not. You just want to use the pretext of civilian status to insulate soldiers from criticism for torture. Torture. Torture. Trying to suppress me isn't going to undo the crimes of American torture. But listening to that criticism just might. Get your head straight.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    36. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Try reading the interview with the translator who firsthand witnessed American torturers in Iraq, and then take a second try at denying torture. If you really cared about America, you'd take that evidence seriously and try to do something about stopping it. Instead of wallowing in denial at any expense. Your American duty is to ensure that your country is not torturing people. Accept that and drop the pretense of false logic that stems from insisting on disproven axioms.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    37. Re:Silent Translator by devilsadvoc8 · · Score: 1

      Man, are your panties in a bunch judging by the above posts. Having a PC translator on the ground has very little to do with alleged torture. You were the first to bring up the torture argument which imo is off topic.

      Its easy for you to proclaim yourself the enlightened liberal and accuse anyone who disagrees with you as a drone and a nazi and someone who is brainwashed by the "american" media: its an ad hominem attack.

      You yourself have ZERO personal knowledge of torture either by Americans on the ground in Iraq or anywhere else in the world. Even sadder, you attempt to verify said alleged torture through the interview of ONE individual. Seems that one individual source may be a bit suspect to me. I would wait for corroboration but then lets not let facts get in the way of your opinion.

      --
      B O R I N G
    38. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      I have not proclaimed myself anything. Try reading the interview to which I linked, with the Army translator who personally witnessed and even participated in torture. Then try your empty denials again. See if you can come up with another gambit to deny the torture.

      This isn't some missed call in a sporting event - it's Americans torturing. What is wrong with you?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    39. Re:Silent Translator by Hymer · · Score: 1

      No I don't, but I am sure that those who are paying for the development of such a device do not care...

    40. Re:Silent Translator by Zen+Punk · · Score: 2

      You know doc, you're a rather frequent poster, and in discussions where you know what you're talking about, you're able to carry on a perfectly civil conversation. It's trolling like this that puts you on my foes list. I've a question for you - it seems to that you're intelligent enough to know what trolling is, and that you're doing it. So why are you whining about the Troll Mod? You know perfectly well you deserve it.

      --
      Sleep is futile.
    41. Re:Silent Translator by Kaenneth · · Score: 1

      Imagine what slashdotters would think if the translators were made by Diebold?

      If they can manage something complex as an election, why not a translation?

    42. Re:Silent Translator by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      First off, the Italian article ends with:
      It seems certain that banned chemical weapons were not used in Fallujah, and the Italian documentary also fails to prove its claim that incendiary bombs were deliberately used to target civilians.

      And second, the wiki article reveals no such "admission", it merely repeats the military's unchanging assertion that 1) white phosphorus as used by the US military is an incendiery, not a chemical weapon; and 2) there was no improper use of white phosphoris munitions. It then bizarrely concludes that they've somehow "admitted" using chemical weapons. Then again, their poor grasp of the details of the subject is exposed by their belief that White Phosphorus munitions are called "Sneaky Pete". Ten seconds with Google informs one that the military slang is "Willie Pete". You see, it's the initials. There's nothing "sneaky" about white phosphorus. The wiki author is a moron.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    43. Re:Silent Translator by ocelotbob · · Score: 1

      Y'know, you'd probably get right along with Bush. Just because I said that your kneejerk reactionaryism is not helpful and that you should think a bit, you accuse me of supporting torture. I don't. Plain and simple. I was criticizing your bringing up the torture issue because it's completely independent of the issue of human translation vs machine translation. As was reported elsewhere in the thread, there are times when that "independent" translator caused more problems than they solved. Or do you not like looking at points of view that don't support your view of the world?

      --

      Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

    44. Re:Silent Translator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can agree to disagree, although I still feel that your comments on Iraq are much like a woman commenting on what it is like to have a penis. Although she may gain some understanding about having a penis from listening to others, she is always using second hand info.
      One thing that I take extreme exception to is your notion that soldiers serve you. That is so far off the mark it isn't funny. I served my country, not you. I fought for democracy, not for you. If you didn't deserve, you don't understand.
      Cops shouldn't give you a ticket, because they work for you, right?
      You seem to be set in your opinion- that is fine. But you make assumptions. Aren't you upset that the people creating these policies executing torture haven't served in the military, yet daily put soldiers into both harm and crime? I thought not. Most soldiers voted for W. W was a pilot- that si a big deal. Don't deny his service.

    45. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      There's nothing uncivil about my original post, or the post in which I point out the TrollMods and their illegitimacy. I raised a perfectly relevant question to the subject: is it worth the cost to eliminate human translators? There's nothing "troll" about that. Except in the eye of the beholder: people who just don't want to talk about American torture in Iraq, the role of translators (as I linked in my post), or anything else which pierces the pure denial that we're torturing people there. So I don't know where you come of so smug in your certainty that not only do I deserve to be modded "Troll", but that somehow I should agree with your mere assertion.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    46. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      No, as I pointed out in my post, the human translator in the Iraqi tortures was one of the only factors possibly working against unlimited, unaccountable, forever secret torture. That is perfectly relevant to us replacing those human translators with machines that won't serve that purpose of helping prevent torture. You can deny you support torture, but there you are struggling to deny it. With the lame excuse that a machine is better than nothing: a strawman arguing with a position I didn't take. Which you argue with obnoxious, filthy personal attacks, when all I did was ask a question - which you could have answered with the counter that machines are better than nothing, better than "enemy" translators. We could have disputed that, but your attack left you no respectable position.

      You came out spitting "kneejerK". Well, my knee does jerk my foot reflexively up the ass of anyone who attacks me the way you did: crude language, bad logic, personal attacks. And now you've got the insipid, gratuitous nonsense about some kind of affinity for Bush. Your point of view is selfserving gibberish. That's the approach that is consistent with Bush and the torturers, who you are defending no matter how you spin it. You're beneath contempt.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    47. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Cops should give me a ticket when I threaten public safety. Because they work for me, and for you. Not for the cops. You don't understand the distinction. I don't accept your softpedaling "agree to disagree". I reject you and your superior attitude. Especially if you're going to cite the Texas flyboy favors which pushed Bush to a flight job he didn't even show up for, so he could dodge service in Vietnam. Which isn't itself so bad, but to then send all our thousands of soldiers to his personal hell in Iraq is unbearable hypocrisy. And for you to cite that as his "service" is at best your delusion.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    48. Re:Silent Translator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Arrgh- we are used to liberals like you not caring about soldiers, and then pretending to care where we are sent when your "concern" supports your liberal position.
      Were you like all those other liberals that ejaculated when the 2000 soldier was killed in Iraq? FUCK YOU YOU PANSY.

    49. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Pretty tough talk from some Anonymous COWARD who's not serving in Iraq or anywhere else. Stopping the torture protects soldiers. Beating the shit out of sissy cowards like you is really just for fun. Why don't you meet me here in New York City, where we show our concern like men? You're not getting any of that "ejaculation" you crave from men you fantasize are "pansies", except maybe as all your sphincters release in your deathrattle. Come on, name the date, and I'll show you how torture is best used to settle a point of contention.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    50. Re:Silent Translator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are a useless fuck who has never fought for anything in his life. YOu equate your posting on message boards with military service. I bet you have a tiny little dick. FUCK YOU!!!!!

    51. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      It is your pathetic whining on this board that you are equating with military service - I never have. And now you're equating your pussy post with meeting me like a grownup. You yellow coward, you don't have the balls to talk about miitary service - you won't even meet me in person to back up your whining. You just whack at your keyboard while fantasizing about my dick. Come out to New York City and I'll beat the shit out of you, just for fun, and you might learn something about fighting. Stupid bitch.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    52. Re:Silent Translator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fucking New York Liberal. Lick my balls BITCH!!! Nobody fantasises about your little, pencil thin, crooked, uncircumcised, schmegma covered dick that is covered in sores from all your hoar fucking.

    53. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      You're the sissy who keeps bringing up my dick in your fantasy posts, bitch - now you're working on visualizing me fucking. Where you won't even take up my challenge to beat you down. Sissy.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    54. Re:Silent Translator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes- i am going to drive to NY from Texas so you can "kick my ass." I love your tough guy threats from behind your computer. That is the funniest thing I have ever heard!!! Thanks for the laugh, partner! HAHAHAHAHA!!! I am going to go make love to my wife. Later PeeWee

    55. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      OK, now that you've got all heated up picturing my dick and me fucking, you can finally go serve your wife. Who'd of course rather have a real man than a sissy and closet queer. If you weren't such a pussy you'd at least demand I go kick your ass down in Texas. But you're a coward spewing bullshit about the military from behind your keyboard, while real soldiers are fighting and dying for your fantasies. Pussy.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    56. Re:Silent Translator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why are you two flaming each other? Seriously- why are you feeding a troll? Why let an AC irritate you? The angrier you get, the more he/she is laughing.

    57. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Well, I think he's flaming me because he feels so impotent while he watches the news repudiate his sadistic warmongering. While I am flaming him because I like gloating about being right all along about cowards like him. I don't care whether he's laughing - I don't care one iota about how they feel. I get my own pleasure offering to kick the ass of some Texas sissy hiding behind a keyboard talking about brave soldiers they could never be themselves. I'm a little sorry its all over the thread for anyone else reading, but I post for my own entertainment. Besides, I'm a New Yorker: we like getting angry; certainly we've got nothing against it, when it's directed at a jerk.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    58. Re:Silent Translator by Alex+P+Keaton+in+da · · Score: 1

      Ugh- Dont feed the trolls. You and I started a conversation a few days ago, and a troll took over. Do you really think that the troll is espousing his true opinions, or just those that he thinks will get you riled up?
      I was in Afghanistan for a long time and then in Iraq for a bit- I don't think I was brave, rather just doing something I believed in.... You would be amazed at how many people I meet who say "Wow, I appreciate what you did.. but...." and then they lay into me about US policy and then beat on me about being "a violent soldier." But the truth is, there are people with whom I agree who I can't stand, as well as people I cant stand with whom I disagree. But usually, once the cable news shouting matches are turned off, everyone gets along okay and we have some decent conversation...

      --
      And All I Ask is a Tall Ship And a Star to Steer Her By
    59. Re:Silent Translator by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck you boy. Come down to Texas and ill kick both your asses. Eat shit and die.

    60. Re:Silent Translator by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      When last we met, you claimed that people without military experience weren't qualified to talk about what goes on in the military. I think that's about as valid as saying men aren't qualified to talk about abortion. These things affect us all, and we're responsible for them. The US military is predicated on civilian command. Bush's personal experience with military service - blowing it off - is part of his ability to screw up our military with his policies, but he's still qualified as a civilian to understand it. It's his personal defects, not his civilian status and experience, that prevent him from understanding sacrifice, strategy and duty.

      More to the point, I raised my question about replacing humans with machines based on a specific, explicit interview with a veteran who'd be replaced by a machine. It doesn't take a military expert, or even a recruit, to tell how his story would be different if he weren't there, but rather a machine instead. As someone who is responsible for voting for the commander-in-chief, as well as congressmembers and others in the military policy system, I am obligated to understand how our policies and methods are affecting our military operations. That doesn't make me special, or an expert, any more than serving in a war zone makes a soldier brave. It is how we acquit our duties that make us special, distinguished by bravery or wisdom. I'm doing my part as best I can. I am proud to live in a country where we can work together, must work together, to mutually protect ourselves from our enemies - including those incompetents (or worse) within our own system. That's the real value of the conversations, which the black/white (or Red/Blue) shouting matches dilute or destroy. The only America that works is a united one.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  2. In Sunni-controlled Iraq... by geekpuppySEA · · Score: 5, Funny

    Language butchers YOU!

    --
    Intelligent Design: because MATH is HARD.
    1. Re:In Sunni-controlled Iraq... by aztracker1 · · Score: 1

      Images of "Mars Attacks" comes straight to my mind... "We are your friends..." "We come in peace"...

      --
      Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
    2. Re:In Sunni-controlled Iraq... by aled · · Score: 1

      This is almost unbelievably. This so much Philip K. Dick that I doubt if we are in the "real" reality or some virtual simulation of one of his stories.
      Don't know if cry or laugh.

      --

      "I think this line is mostly filler"
  3. A bit obvious by haluness · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But it is absolutely to the point where it could be useful in some carefully chosen situations.

    Seems like you could say that for any new, generally unproven, technique

    1. Re:A bit obvious by halltk1983 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think I'd use it as a check device to see if the "local" translator was lying to me. If the difference is blatant, then maybe I'd find another translator.

      --
      Watch for Penguins, they eat Apples and throw rocks at Windows.
    2. Re:A bit obvious by Bloke+down+the+pub · · Score: 1
      I think I'd use it as a check device to see if the "local" translator was lying to me. If the difference is blatant, then maybe I'd find another translator.
      I got a browser problem. Can anybody help me? Is it a virus? It seems to be replacing "a car battery and attach it to his knackers" with "another translator".
      --
      It's true I tell you, feller at work's next door neighbour read it in the paper.
    3. Re:A bit obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or to see if the (human) government translator is lying (changing what a person says to justify a fiasco, etc.)

  4. Oh teh noes by paranode · · Score: 4, Funny

    This have disaster writed all over it!

    1. Re:Oh teh noes by identity0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ah, but will it be able to replicate the great cross-cultural interactions from Hollywood movies?

      Soldier: Ma'am, have you seen any suspicious men in the area?
      Translator: Woman, have you been consorting with men not of your family?

      Iraqi: Fuck you!
      Translator: Me love you long time.

      Soldier: What the fuck?
      Translator: Which way shall we fornicate?

      Iraqi: Agh, you Americans make me so aggravated!
      Translator: Me so horny.

      hilarity ensues. Face it, you know these are going to be programmed by lonely geeks with dirty thoughts on their minds.

    2. Re:Oh teh noes by rocketsled · · Score: 1

      Soldier: Please come out of your car.

      Translator:durqa,durqa,durqa-durqa,durqa

    3. Re:Oh teh noes by Silentnite · · Score: 1

      First time Ever i have laughed outloud at slashdot.

    4. Re:Oh teh noes by crazyphilman · · Score: 1

      Sadly, PFC Johnson had installed the PC version of a popular older first-person shooter videogame called "Sin", along with a rip of the DVD movie "Pulp Fiction" on his translating laptop, and some of the files were mis-installed.

      Iraqi Militant: "Ok, I'm surrendering. Look, I'm giving you my AK-47. Ok? Here it is."
      BEEP! WHIRR!
      Machine: "OK, I surrender. Look at giving AK-47. OK. Here is it."
      BEEP!
      PFC Johnson: "Ok, no problem, just set it on the hummvee."
      BEEP! WHIRR!
      Machine (in arabic): "I'm gonna make you my bitch!"
      BEEP!
      Iraqi: "Pardon me?"
      BEEP! WHIRR!
      Machine: "Motherfucker, please!"
      BEEP!
      PFC Johnson: "Now, hang on, there's no call for that."
      BEEP! WHIRR!
      Machine: "And, you will know my name is the LORD! When I bring my vengeance down upon thee!"
      BEEP!
      Iraqi: "Wait a moment, I am giving you my weapon, vengeance is not entirely appropriate!"
      BEEP! WHIRR!
      Machine: "I'm gonna make you my bitch!" (the guy in SIN said that a lot, too)
      BEEP!
      PFC Johnson: "FREEZE! HANDS ON YOUR HEADS!"
      BEEP! WHIRR!
      Machine: "I'M A MUSHROOM CLOUD LAYING MOTHERFUCKER, MOTHERFUCKER!"
      BEEP!
      Iraqi: "EVERYBODY SHOOT! THE AMERICANS HAVE GONE NUTS! ATTACK! ATTACK!"
      BEEP! WHIRR!

      Iraqi: "ATTACK! THE AMERICANS HAVE GONE MAD!"

      --
      Farewell! It's been a fine buncha years!
  5. But... by arvindn · · Score: 3, Funny

    Will it fit in my ear?

    1. Re:But... by Minwee · · Score: 4, Funny

      Only if you hang your robe on the hook, put the towel over the grate, drop your satchel in front of the panel and then put the pile of junk mail on top of the satchel before pressing the dispenser button.

    2. Re:But... by Phae · · Score: 1

      Damn! Why is that modded funny? It's definitely Informative+5. I never figured out I had to pull out the freaking junk mail... I mean, now that I look at it it's completely obvious! Time to go play that again.

    3. Re:But... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I stopped playing HG right there! I couldn't stop the friggin babelfish from slipping all over the place and down that grate!

  6. Man's Voice... by RedACE7500 · · Score: 1

    I wonder why they chose a man's voice and not the voice of a female infidel!

    1. Re:Man's Voice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I just hope they have descently improved the computer voice from what has been generally developed for the commercial market. Microsoft Sam telling someone to put their fu**ing hands up ain't gonna cut it.

      Maybe they could use resamples of the computer voice off TNG.

    2. Re:Man's Voice... by Tlosk · · Score: 1

      Oddly enough using whole word samples sounds worse unless you have a very small number of phrases you'll be using. Because we run our words together it becomes extremely stilted if each word is pronounced in isolation (try it out loud yourself).

      Speech production is one of those things that can only be done well in very constrained situations. Any kind of variability or complexity and it becomes extremely difficult.

  7. Stormtroopers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm guessing that there's going to be some sort of face attachment so that soldiers can use both hands to do soldierly things, like holding weapons. While a real time translator is extremely cool I can only imagine how uncool someone in full combat armor and a computerized voice coming from a completely hidden face breaking through my door would be.

  8. Bad idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Trusting a computer to do real-time translation in a volatile, war-torn region...

    English: "We applaud the creation of your new constitution and are preparing to pull our troops out of the country so that the rebuilding process can begin."
    Arabic: "All your base are belong to us."

    1. Re:Bad idea. by vux984 · · Score: 4, Funny

      English: "We applaud the creation of your new constitution and are preparing to pull our troops out of the country so that the rebuilding process can begin."

      Arabic: "All your base are belong to us."

      Wow, this is the most advanced translater built. Unlike most which simply try direct literal translations, this one can actually parse the intent of what Bush actually meant when he said that!

      Bravo!

    2. Re:Bad idea. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other news, it was revealed that the "translator" is merely a recording of Bush saying "All your base are belong to us" which plays whenever the microphone detects someone speaking into it. ;)

    3. Re:Bad idea. by CptPicard · · Score: 0, Troll

      I think you've got it the wrong way around completely... or then you're just being naive...

      It's more like

      GI Joe: "HARHAR!! I 0wn j00 Arab dogz!!1 HOWS THAT FOR 9/11!! OH MAN ITS LIKE GTA!! NOW DROP YOUR PANTS FOR A GOOD ABU GHRAIB ASS RAPE!!"

      Translator: "We bring you freedom and democracy! Join us in building a new and better Iraq for you and your people!"

      --
      I want to play Free Market with a drowning Libertarian.
  9. Star Trek by Momoru · · Score: 1

    One more invention that gets us closer to Star Trek-tech reality.

    1. Re:Star Trek by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Yes. Soon we'll have transporters, computers that sound like Majel Barrett, annoying androids, and a really hot sexy Vulcan whose actions seem to resemble that of a very bad actress. This will ultimately lead to the cancellation of our species due to a lack of interest save by people who haven't had a date in ten years.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Star Trek by Parkaman · · Score: 1

      As if Islam wasn't expanding fast enough, now they'll be able to quickly tranlate the Qu'ran into Klingon? And they think it sounds beautiful in Arabic...

      --
      "It's entirely personal, though at one remove."
    3. Re:Star Trek by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 1

      The reality where the computer, upon hearing the first snippit of a never-before-encountered language, begins providing a perfect translation? Though it never bothered to activate when Worf was swearing in Klingon. After all, it was a family show.

      In retrospect, the Universal Translator was one of the more absurd things about the Star Trek universe.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

    4. Re:Star Trek by erpbridge · · Score: 1

      True, most episodes of Star Trek (and a lot of other space sci-fi shows that involve alien races) have a universal translator, and those translators not only transform the words, but also the mouths speaking them, into perfect gramatically correct English.

      Since this IS Slashdot, I'd be remiss in reminding you of the one episode of one Star Trek show that actually showed how the universal translator works on a brand new language: DS9 S2 E10, Sanctuary. This actually showed the universal translator needing a significant sample from the other race before it stated translating bits and pieces, like common words.

      The other episode about learning languages, TNG S5 E02, Darmok, shows a big weakness of the universal translator... that of a race that doesn't follow similar grammar rules to existing Earth languages, but speaks in a totally different fashion (in this case, concepts and events relevant to that races own history.) Of course, this is a HORRIBLE example, as how does this race communicate their own history to their young? Or even start to talk! But it does show the good point that not all languages follow the same grammar rules as we on Earth have standardized on.

      ERP

  10. A simple test would be to by it0 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Have that thing read the Koran from arabix to english and then vice versa, then by the number offended devided by all moslims gives you a nice error rate.

    1. Re:A simple test would be to by wealthychef · · Score: 1

      Parent posting sounds like it was translated by the device in the article.

      --
      Currently hooked on AMP
    2. Re:A simple test would be to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I had to guess, I'd say your post got translated "from arabix to english and then vice versa"...

    3. Re:A simple test would be to by Mignon · · Score: 1

      Try new, improved Arabix! Part of this complete breakfast.

    4. Re:A simple test would be to by pmancini · · Score: 1

      I suppose it would the be a good baseline to compare it to the misinterpretations by the Islamist and Wahabists Mullas. Who knows, perhaps it will spawn yet another psycho sect of Islam. That's JUST what we need!

  11. One of the most important inventions ever... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    ...especially to people who grew up watching star trek. Really though it's most important because the technology can eventually eliminate the need for trade languages, which can eventually erode the use of local, cultural language. Since we [predominantly] think in language, people who speak different languages think differently and that is valuable. At the same time, it will probably never eliminate the need for fluent human translators, because sentience appears to be a necessary quality for the best command of language.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:One of the most important inventions ever... by Xarius · · Score: 2, Insightful

      because sentience appears to be a necessary quality for the best command of language.

      And if slashdot, indeed the entire internet, is any indication--sentience usually isn't enough either.

      --
      C17H21NO4
    2. Re:One of the most important inventions ever... by Woldry · · Score: 1

      You sound as though you think the average slashdot user (or internet user) is actually sentient.

      --
      How can a post be modded "overrated" or "underrated" when it hasn't been rated yet?
  12. Ah, but... by fiannaFailMan · · Score: 4, Funny

    Will it be able to instantly start translating from an alien language that it has never heard before as soon as the other person appears on the main viewer?

    --
    Drill baby drill - on Mars
    1. Re:Ah, but... by TheDauthi · · Score: 1

      Not until version 3.

    2. Re:Ah, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah... but that doesn't work when the aliens speak a language based on metaphor.

    3. Re:Ah, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not in the Standard version. You'll need to upgrade to the UltraTranslator Futura 2000 "Performance Pack."

    4. Re:Ah, but... by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      fiannaFailMan on slashdot, when the post humored

  13. A shortlist of conversations by tezza · · Score: 1, Funny
    Please, lie down on the ground in very many pieces

    I'm only doing this to fund my College, so don't make me shoot

    That's not Napalm, that's MK77

    We have an Embedded Reporter, we will be handing out Sweets and having a laugh

    I don't know when your government or mine is going to pull me out of here either.

    --
    [% slash_sig_val.text %]
    1. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Good God it must be depressing for you to watch a happy people embrace democracy

      --
      Fuck it
    2. Re:A shortlist of conversations by DigiShaman · · Score: 2

      It's a sad day for most liberal as it shatters their world view of freedom and how it's obtained using military actions against those that hate freedom and democracy.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    3. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wish I had mod points

      well said

    4. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ignorance is bliss, right?
      Or was it "ignorance is strength"?

      Either way don't worry, that TV will tell you everything the righteous and democratic American Government decides you need to know.

    5. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I will believe that iraqis have democracy when the iraqi policemen can arrest Americans for crimes and when they joil OPEC so as to get the highest price possible for their oil.

      Until those things happen Iraq is simply a US colony.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    6. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      all those pesky rights they enjoyed under the Baathists

      Just kill yourself now.

      (And yes, the rest of your post was as ass-headed and wrong as that line.)

      --
      Fuck it
    7. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Black-Man · · Score: 1

      No kidding... I can only imagine the cabinet level meeting... "This guy tried to kill my daddy. You... there... boy with all the stars on his lapel... get this bad guy."

    8. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      Well, yes, I suppose the crazies will always believe what they want...

      --
      Fuck it
    9. Re:A shortlist of conversations by jdfox · · Score: 1

      >>Good God it must be depressing for you to watch a happy people embrace democracy

      >>Well, yes, I suppose the crazies will always believe what they want...

      Thanks, no further comment required.

    10. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      I'm sure your delusions are comforting.

      (BRING BACK SADDAM!)

      --
      Fuck it
    11. Re:A shortlist of conversations by AoT · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but under Saddam and the Baathists women in Iraq enjoyed more rights than women in any other country in the middle east. Go read about shit before you have a knee-jerk reaction.

    12. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      lol

      Except the ones who were raped and tortured by their beloved dictator, right?

      Maybe they should talk to the fine Israeli women who serve in the military, or the knesset, or any other job that a man can do. Plus they don't have to wear a burka or marry their cousins, or get tortured and dumped in a mass grave by your pal Saddam. That's freedom in the middle east. Saddam, on the other hand, was just a run-of-the-mill (though particularly brutal) dictator.. no wonder you like him.

      (Oh, sorry, you don't actually like him, and yet you think that "under Saddam and the Baathists women in Iraq enjoyed" -- where's he gonna go with this? anything will be funny! -- "more rights than women in any other country in the middle east.")

      As I said -- lol. Anyway, women in free Iraq, along with women in Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, UAE, and any number of other countries didn't have it quite so bad as women under Saddam. Nice to see progressives stand up for a woman-hating serial rapist and murderer, though!

      --
      Fuck it
    13. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really like hating people you have never met, prick.

    14. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1

      YOu don't have to be crazy, all you have to do is to be a republitard. It's amazing how much crazy shit people believe when they get all their noews from Rush Limbaugh and Bill Oreilly.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    15. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1

      What did saddam ever do to you?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    16. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      Ah, the perfect "liberal" quote. Do you mind if I frame it and put it up on my wall?

      --
      Fuck it
    17. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Thundersnatch · · Score: 1

      He invaded Kuwait back in 1990, and for a few weeks there, it cost me an arm and a leg to fill up my conversion van. Bastard.

    18. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      P.S. maybe it's time to update your retarded sig?

      --
      Fuck it
    19. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      Actually, I'm not a Republican and never listen to Rush or watch Bill. Fox was illegal in Canada until a few months ago, and I don't think Rush Limbaugh's show is syndicated anywhere here, although I don't really listen to radio so I could be wrong about that.

      --
      Fuck it
    20. Re:A shortlist of conversations by jdfox · · Score: 1

      > P.S. maybe it's time to update your retarded sig?
      > --
      > The world is getting more democratic [publiuspundit.com]

      Come on, Mr. Troll. You're making this far too easy.

    21. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      I know you don't read much, but surely you're aware of the dozens of millions of newly free people over the last few years? Retard.

      --
      Fuck it
    22. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Do that. Right after you answer my question.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    23. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1

      I think people like you need constant reminding that evil is what you do. Your acts not your intentions. You war pigs need reminding constantly that killing people is wrong, invading countries and stealing their natural resources are wrong.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    24. Re:A shortlist of conversations by jdfox · · Score: 1

      > Retard.

      LOL...
      Tsk, tsk, tsk! Temper, temper, Mr. Troll!

    25. Re:A shortlist of conversations by AdjustableTool · · Score: 1

      Stinkypants!

    26. Re:A shortlist of conversations by flyingsquid · · Score: 1
      Just kill yourself now.

      You know, I've noticed that recently, the radical right wing on Slashdot has (a) quieted down a bit (thank god), and (b) when they do post, tend to go off on emotional rants and irrational name-calling with little logic or evidence to back them up.

      The problem is that the Neocons have had their way, they've had an extraordinary amount of freedom- thanks to the blank check of 9/11 and a solid conservative majority in Congress- and they've royally screwed it up. We've gone from Big Government to even bigger government with things like the Patriot Act and the ineffective bureacracy of Homeland Security. The Republicans have made the Democrats look like a bunch of amateurs when it comes to spending money and have run up an enormous budget deficit. Afghanistan was done right, I'll admit, and the invasion of Iraq was a heck of a piece of work, but the occupation has been a disaster. It was meant to secure America's place as the sole remaining superpower, and instead George W. Bush and the neocons may have single-handedly ended the era of American dominance. Now Iran is busy thumbing their nose at us and probably building nuclear weapons, because they know there's not a damn thing we can do but call them names, because we've got our hands full with Iraq.

      The conservative think-tanks have been talking for years about what they would do if they got control of the government. They got that control, they put their ideas into practice... and their ideas don't work. Unfortunately, Clinton is five years in the past, and the Democrats are spineless and powerless, so there's really no one else to take the blame. Face it- you guys had your chance, you did your best, and you failed catastrophically. If the neocons had any honesty, they'd admit it. And then we could get to the work of figuring out how to get out of this mess.

    27. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      ok sure. First of all, Saddam tortured (real torture) and slaughtered hundreds of thousands if not millions of people. That's the sort of thing that shocks and calls to action any reasonable person, since we're capable of feeling empathy for people other than ourselves. Not that some psycho dictator has any sovereignty anyway, but mass murder is what's called a crime against humanity, and requires a response from decent humans who are not his direct victims. Second, Saddam has in the past attempted to build a variety of weapons of mass destruction and means of delivery (including rockets and terrorist tools), and at no point did he lose the desire to build or acquire them, and he also desired to use them against civilian populations, i.e. you and me. In other words, he wanted and without intervention eventually would have been able to kill you, me, and people we care about. That's another thing he's done to me.

      Are you too thick to understand that? It should be fairly obvious, but I guess our schools aren't what they used to be...

      --
      Fuck it
    28. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      Right... "peace in our time".....

      --
      Fuck it
    29. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      Wow, you write good fiction. Are you published?

      --
      Fuck it
    30. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Intelligent+Design · · Score: 1
      80% percent of those "happy people" (I'm assuming you meant Iraqis) want the occupying militaries to leave immediately.

      As the U.S. continues to "help" Iraq deal with the anti-democratic insurgents, areas of the country will start looking more and more like Palestine. The insurgents aren't in their "last throes"; the government reps who think a U.S. pull-out would be letting the insurgents win want to continue the same thing that's been going on for the last 40 years in Israel/Palestine in Iraq too.

      The thing is, it doesn't matter what government reps want. The most legitimate polls in Iraq indicate the vast majority of the population want the foreign militaries to leave, whatever the consequences. Those were the results since the beginning the of war, and the percentage holding that opinion has only increased since. The true measure of democracy is when the policies of representative governments reflect those of the population they govern.

    31. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1

      LOL, I'll believe that when Iraq joins OPEC!

      --
      evil is as evil does
    32. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      Suit yourself, idiot.

      Evil is as evil does!!1!one

      --
      Fuck it
    33. Re:A shortlist of conversations by jdfox · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's the sort of thing that shocks and calls to action any reasonable person, since we're capable of feeling empathy for people other than ourselves.

      Here's a shocked Donald Rumsfeld, called to action.

    34. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      What, do you think I'm Donald Rumsfeld?

      You must have terrible nightmares, if everywhere you go you're haunted by mirages of Rumsfeld and Rove and co.

      --
      Fuck it
    35. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      " First of all, Saddam tortured (real torture) and slaughtered hundreds of thousands if not millions of people."

      So did George Bush, what of it?

      "That's the sort of thing that shocks and calls to action any reasonable person, since we're capable of feeling empathy for people other than ourselves"

      I don't think so. I certainly don't recally anybody doing anything about it while it was happening.

      "Saddam has in the past attempted to build a variety of weapons of mass destruction and means of delivery (including rockets and terrorist tools)"

      So did George Bush, what of it?

      "and at no point did he lose the desire to build or acquire them, and he also desired to use them against civilian populations, i.e. you and me."

      Clearly you are a super duper psychic able to read the minds of Iraqi dictators from thousands of miles away. I stand in awe of your supernatural talent.

      "In other words, he wanted and without intervention eventually would have been able to kill you, me, and people we care about. That's another thing he's done to me."

      So what he did to you is WANT to kill you. I want to kill you too, are you going to invade my state and kill thousands of civillians too?

      "Are you too thick to understand that? It should be fairly obvious, but I guess our schools aren't what they used to be..."

      Oooops I see you slipped there. YOu pretend to be from Canada but a slip of the tongue has given you away.

      Oh I have an idea. We have saddam in custody right? He is going to be tried right? Why don't we try him WANTING to kill you!. BHAHAHAHAAHAHA. Oh and why don't we try him for gassing the Kurds. OH the inhumanity of it all, a trial would be perfect to show the world how evil Saddam was for killing hundreds of thousands of civillians.

      SO what say you mr republitard? Are you for dropping the mickey mouse charges against him and trying him for his real crimes? For developing chemical weapons and using them against the kurds? Why hasn't the administration charged him for those crimes? Could be because all kinds of unpleasant facts will come into light?

      Could it mr Republitard? Could that possibly be the reason nobody has charged him with the things you accuse him of?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    36. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Not as long as sadistic war pigs like you are around getting vicarious pleasure from the deaths of other people.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    37. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      lol, new levels of derangement!

      I didn't think I was trolling, but based on the lunatic answers I got, I suppose it probably does look like I was just fishing for crazies.

      As for your actual "points," where are George Bush's mass graves? Oh right, there aren't any. Do you seriously not expect Iraqis to hang Mr. Hussein ("President of Iraq") for gassing Kurds as well as the other crimes, including the ones he's being tried for now? Is Amerikkka trying to kill you now? Do you really believe I'm not from Canada? Do you have any other interesting fantasies?

      I love the internet -- a direct pipeline to the greatest depths of insanity...

      --
      Fuck it
    38. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1
      --
      Fuck it
    39. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you really believe I'm not from Canada?

      Well he might be from Canada, but he lives in Tucson.

    40. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      eh? That's not my site, I just link to it to up the pagerank and recommend it.

      (And for what it's worth, your skills aren't so hot, a dns registration doesn't necessarily indicate where people are from -- I've no idea where Robert Mayer lives.)

      --
      Fuck it
    41. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Wow, you write good fiction. Are you published?

      Is that it ? or was there something you wanted to add ?

    42. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1

      What is your prediction for the date Iraq is allowed to join OPEC?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    43. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1

      "As for your actual "points," where are George Bush's mass graves?"

      There is a mass grave outside of Fallujia where a soccer field used to be. I have also seen news reports that showed mass graves in afghanistan. There was one outside of khandahar and one outside of mezari-sherif. Those are the three I know of. There are probably a lot more. Do you know of any?

      "Do you seriously not expect Iraqis to hang Mr. Hussein ("President of Iraq") for gassing Kurds as well as the other crimes, including the ones he's being tried for now?"

      No I don't expect them to hang hussein for killing kurds. He is not being tried for that. Sure he will be killed based on the mickey mouse crimes he has been charged with but it won't be because he gassed the kurds. He has never been charged with that. Maybe he wasn't responsible for that huh? I mean if he was responsible surely we would have included those charges right?

      "Do you really believe I'm not from Canada? Do you have any other interesting fantasies?"

      No I don't believe you are from Canada. You said "our education system" it was a telling slip of your tongue.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    44. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Are you under some delusion that the page you linked to makes you less of a war pig or less of a republitard?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    45. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1

      LOL. Too fucking retarded.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    46. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      What, you think we don't have an education system in Canada? Really, it's bad, but it's not that bad ;)

      --
      Fuck it
    47. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      It's silly to call me names right when I'm showing you how ignorant you are. (And undercutting your whole point, but you probably missed that..)

      --
      Fuck it
    48. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Keep trying to weazel out of it. It's hilarious.

      --
      evil is as evil does
    49. Re:A shortlist of conversations by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Once again. How does that link make you any less of a war pig or a republitard?

      I have been meaning to ask you? Do you jerk off when you see the coverage of the explosions?

      --
      evil is as evil does
    50. Re:A shortlist of conversations by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      Oh, and, once again I guess I'll give you a response to your supposed points...

      There is a mass grave outside of Fallujia where a soccer field used to be.

      Those aren't innocents who were brutally massacred by a dictator for being the wrong race, they're the terrorists who you think are imaginary, plus some accidental casualties. People who fight from mosques, use human shields, massacre citizens, blow up schools, etc., are meant to be buried in soccer fields. Likewise with your more hypothetical mass graves, the U.S. kills a lot of terrorists, that means fewer jihadis to wage war against infidels like you.

      If you can't tell the difference between Saddam's gulags and mass murder, and the coalition's destruction of terrorist scum, then either you're irreparably stupid or you have no moral judgment whatsoever.

      Sure he will be killed based on the mickey mouse crimes he has been charged with

      Yep, murdering 143 Shiites is a "mickey mouse crime" -- some moral judgment. Why don't you tell that to your Shiite friends, I'm sure they'll be glad to know how much you value their lives.

      but it won't be because he gassed the kurds. He has never been charged with that. Maybe he wasn't responsible for that huh? I mean if he was responsible surely we would have included those charges right?

      Are you illiterate? I know you're not very bright, but Jesus, don't you read at all? Every news story on Saddam for several months, even in the dumb leftist rags that you probably read, has clearly pointed out that prosecutors are starting with this "mickey mouse crime" (God you're a sick son-of-a-bitch) and will follow it up with charges for WMD attacks on Kurds, invading Kuwait, massacring Shiites and Sunnis, etc.

      No I don't believe you are from Canada. You said "our education system" it was a telling slip of your tongue.

      OK, I already responded to this one, but I still think it's funny. C'mon, boy, you're like 0-for-3 now, and you're still playing? (Well, probably more like 0-for-53, but I haven't been keeping count.)

      --
      Fuck it
    51. Re:A shortlist of conversations by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      In fact if the conservatives had done a conservative job the US would be better off. Don't worry so much after the International scene, hand over the UN the tough and thankless job of handling Saddam Hussein, under control of course (it seems they were doing OK after all), reduce the size of government, promote individual freedoms, lower taxes for everybody.

      But no, they did almost the opposite of all that. How they can still be called conservatives is beyond me.

  14. Ack! Ack! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Stop! Don't run! We are your friends!

  15. Iraqi-Hungarian Phrasebook? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    "My Hovercraft is full of eels!"

  16. I weel not buy this record.... by Radical+Moderate · · Score: 1

    I hope Alexander Yacht* wasn't on the development team!

    *Obscure Monty Python reference

    --
    Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
    1. Re:I weel not buy this record.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either it's so obscure I've never heard of it, or you've got Raymond Luxury-Yacht's name mixed up. I don't blame you, since it *is* pronounced "Throat Warbler-Mangrove".

    2. Re:I weel not buy this record.... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      I'll see your MP reference, and raise you a Terry Prachett:

      Quickly! More boiling oil!
      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  17. Freedom is Slavery - it translates well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    War is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength.

    The translator works very well in Iraq and the US.

    1. Re:Freedom is Slavery - it translates well by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now I realize that I love big brother.

    2. Re:Freedom is Slavery - it translates well by Pretendstocare · · Score: 1
  18. Wouldn't Gallach be more useful? by csoto · · Score: 1

    I for one, welcome our Fishspeaker overlords.

    --
    There exists no way of exchanging information without making judgments. --Bene Gesserit Axiom
  19. hrmmm... by danath333 · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'd always wanted to know how to say "Get the fuck on the ground or i'll blow your fucking head off." in Arabic.

    1. Re:hrmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reply: Is that anatomically possible?

    2. Re:hrmmm... by Darius+Jedburgh · · Score: 0, Troll

      English is so crude. Throw a few 'fucks' here and there and you think you've spiced up your language. We're talking Arabic here. You need to at least mention melons, boys, mothers and camels, as well as carnal relations.

    3. Re:hrmmm... by devilsadvoc8 · · Score: 1

      And how far apart in meaning is the word "fuck" from carnal relations?

      --
      B O R I N G
    4. Re:hrmmm... by Darius+Jedburgh · · Score: 1

      And how far apart in meaning is "A, B, C, D as well as E" from just E?

  20. Just some thoughts. by Amiasian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've thought of an implementation like this for some time, only I was thinking of the added element of sampling the user's voice with phonemes in the language to be translated to and then averaging that sound sample with the computer so that you could hear it somewhat spoken in the user's voice. Eventually, this would be a simple headset that could be worn, and you'd talk into a microphone and have some speakers around your ears broadcast what you said in translated form. Those speakers could also be a sort of unidirectional microphone for picking up on the foreign language-speaker's voice and translating it back.

    It'd be for one-to-one conversations, of course.
    Unless we get to a point where we can separate individual voices in real time and then translate them and have the computer dynamically assign a digital voice to each of the translations so we don't get a jumbled conversation.

    1. Re:Just some thoughts. by djmurdoch · · Score: 1

      have some speakers around your ears broadcast what you said in translated form.

      Well, if I was trying to think of the worst place to put speakers that produced a language I don't understand, "around my ears" would be pretty much the first choice.

  21. I've tried out the online demo and it's sweet! by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 5, Funny

    I tried out the online demo that works through the web browser. I wondered what "I hope the weather is clement when you arive" would translate into. You get:

    "durka durka mohammed jihad durka durka"

    Super!

    1. Re:I've tried out the online demo and it's sweet! by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 1

      Matt Damon? Matt Damon!

  22. Yay! by Caspian · · Score: 0, Redundant

    So now the soldiers can march around Iraq saying "My hovercraft is full of eels" in Arabic.

    Or maybe "ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO U.S.".

    --
    With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
    1. Re:Yay! by vertinox · · Score: 2, Funny

      Or better yet... A little squawky voice that says:

      "WE COME IN PEACE! WE COME IN PEACE!"

      Apologies to Tim Burton.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  23. O rly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    American Soldier: We are here to help you my Iraqi friends.

    *translator buzzes, whistles*

    Translator: Derk Derk Allah, Muhammad Jihad. Paka Sherpa Sherpa, Bakallah.

  24. What about idioms? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm curious how "What's up?" or "Holy crap!" is translated ...

    1. Re:What about idioms? by c_forq · · Score: 1

      Judging by the summary (I'm not so new here that I actually RTFA) I would say it doesn't, or does it very porrly. This seems like it will be used between Iraqis and Americans on the same side, who know the translations won't be that great, and to get a rough check on local translators. This does not seem like it will be used for small talk, talking with hostiles, negotiations, or anything like that.

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
  25. FINALLY!!! by orbit86 · · Score: 1

    YES FINALLY when the Iraqi's threaten to cut your throat they will not misunderstand it for "I love you"

  26. how about English Mexican Spanish? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This sounds like just the thing for talking to streetwalkers in Tijuana.

  27. this is how this will go by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Iraqi: "Let me get my ID in my pocket, please, Mr. nice american soldier who is freeing my country"
    Machine translation: "I have a detonator in my pocket, you zionist"
    Soldier: "die, focker! Four more years!"

  28. Monty Python says, "bad idea." by goodmanj · · Score: 0, Redundant

    My hovercraft is full of eels!

  29. Re:Language is not the problem in Iraq... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or we could build a translator that will change sentences that they don't like to sentences that they do like. Example: "I will drop napalm on your town" could translate to "I dig that Allah dude".

  30. If it says "Bite the wax tadpole"... by gatkinso · · Score: 1

    ...I will laugh my ass off.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  31. another great acheivement for mankind by TimeSpeak · · Score: 1

    one step closer to my fembot fantasy girlfriend, featuring(Audrey UK)'s voice from http://www.research.att.com/projects/tts/demo.html

    --
    Am no fek Buddhist, but this is enlightenment.
    1. Re:another great acheivement for mankind by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wicked! I love it

  32. Mars Attacks! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Was anybody else reminded of the translators used by the aliens in Mars Attacks! when reading this? http://imdb.com/title/tt0116996/

  33. It had to be by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

    I guess it had to be a man's voice, otherwise what the hell is it doing outside without a male companion? They'd have to do a kill -honor arabictran

    --
    Fuck it
  34. This was already possible by matt+me · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I managed something similar a year or so back, in an attempt to create a 'babelfish'. Of course the input/output had to be specified, and it had a very limited range of languages - certainly no universal translator but it did use all free software (as that's all I have).
    0) Input recording of English languagge
    1) Voice recognition software (Sphinx) pipes output to
    2) Script using online translator to convert between language
    3) Festival stumbles out an imhuman gramatically-wrong rendition of the input.

    It wasn't exactly in realtime, I just fed it recordings, for which it would then output an audio file in the other language. The worst step was the voice recognition, which didn't work great even when given the output of the voice syntethisier.

    Sphinx http://cmusphinx.sourceforge.net/html/cmusphinx.ph p

    1. Re:This was already possible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From your link...

      The Sphinx Group at Carnegie Mellon University is committed to releasing the long-time, DARPA-funded Sphinx projects widely, in order to stimulate the creation of speech-using tools and applications, and to advance the state of the art both directly in speech recognition, as well as in related areas including dialog systems and speech synthesis.

      The Sphinx Group has been supported for many years by funding from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the recognition engines to be released are those that the group used for the various DARPA projects and their respective evaluations.

      Interesting....

  35. Danger! by Dog135 · · Score: 4, Funny

    English: We are here to save you!
    Translation: We are here to collect you!

    Seems to work fine to me!

    --
    "That's so plausible, I can't believe it!" - Leela
    1. Re:Danger! by c_forq · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      After the Religous Conservatives get to it that will change though, it will be:
      English: We are here to save you.
      Translation: We are here to tell you the good news.

      I can see it now... "No one expects the American Inquisition"

      --
      Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
    2. Re:Danger! by sharkey · · Score: 1

      English: We are here to protect you!
      Translation: Pak Chooie Unf!

      --

      --
      "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
  36. When will we learn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess these scientists never saw Mars Attacks.

  37. Human translators not very reliable either by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But it is absolutely to the point where it could be useful in some carefully chosen situations."

    I think it is far more useful than many people realize given that many people have too much faith in human translators. I was watching a discovery channel episode of "Off to War" and a US officer had his men hold their fire when they saw armed insurgents because they were not sure where the Iraqi police attached to the unit were. Afterwards the US officer tells the translator to tell the police that he had to hold his fire because he did not know where they were and that they must let him know when they leave the group. Subtitles show that the translator really says something like: You idiots! You completely screwed up the mission ... So much for the diplomacy and professionalism the US officer was trying to convey.

    1. Re:Human translators not very reliable either by shadowpuppy · · Score: 1

      Might make a nice check for human translators then. Obviously a human can convey the subtlies better. However the machine should help you sanity check what your translator is saying.

    2. Re:Human translators not very reliable either by try_anything · · Score: 1

      Yes! I've seen something virtually identical on TV. A translator translated "Much better, we got A right, but now we need to concentrate on B. Let's try again and pay careful attention to floodling the B." to "OK, he's pleased by your progress, now try again."

      Even worse is when translators are rewarded for skewing to what the audience wants to hear. Television translators are the worst. When the mayor of a small town in a Latin American country says:

      "It's very difficult to ship goods to the city because this road was damaged by a flood almost a year ago. We've requested funds from the federal government to repair this road multiple times over many months, and we haven't received a satisfactory response. There is a government project for exactly this kind of thing, but the official who controls the money is from a party that gets no support here, so he sends the money elsewhere."

      How do you make that interesting and satisfying to an American audience?

      Well, liberals love hearing about simple helpless people who need to be saved from injustice. Conservatives love hearing that poor countries are that way because the people are all corrupt, stupid, and/or lacking in initiative. So, just add an English voice-over in a slow, heavily accented dumb peasant voice:

      "Things are very bad here since the flood. We need money to repair this road. When we ask the government for money it ignores us. The government is supposed to help us but it is bad and corrupt."

      Bingo. Now you have television.

  38. This could be very useful... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I don't think you could trust your life with it, but it's still better than nothing.
    I've seen alot of videos on the Net which show abuse by American soldiers, most of the times triggered because there is no proper translator around to at least -explaint- some of the actions being taken.

    A shame I have to post this as an AC...

  39. If the administration controlled the voice... by geekpuppySEA · · Score: 3, Funny
    American soldier 1: We didn't plan on leaving the electricity and water off for months, you know.

    Administration-enabled translator: We are so happy that you love America for toppling your eeeeeeevil dictatorship!

    American soldier 2: Hoo yah, we're gonna git us some awl!

    Administration-enabled translator: We are going to train you to defend yourselves before we leave!

    American soldier 3: Dude, I was totally kidding about your sister

    Administration-enabled translator: Why do you HATE FREEDOM?!

    American soldier 4: See, we worship the same thing, really - God, Allah, means the same thing!

    Administration-enabled translator: Praise JESUS!

    --
    Intelligent Design: because MATH is HARD.
  40. Yes, I can picture it... by ladybugfi · · Score: 1

    From a crackling loudspeaker on the hummer's roof: "My hovercraft is full of eels!"

  41. Best case scenario by CasmirRadon · · Score: 1
    "No one in the military would make life or death decisions based on a machine translation," Benjamin said.

    I would really like to believe this is true, and I hesitate to admit a lack of trust in soldiers to follow this common sense guideline. Still, it is all too easy to imagine situations in which time is limited, stress is high, and this new translator is the only thing available.

  42. Mod parent up ! by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Absolutely !
    That was the first thing that occurred to me too.
    That alone could make it worth it's weight in lives.

    --

    Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    1. Re:Mod parent up ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except that there are situations in which a machine translation might give you exactly the opposite tranlation of what is intended by the speaker. Or something meaningless. Try to translate "That's so bad!" from English to Dutch and back again in Babelfish. What do you get? "That's so prayed!"

      Translation is an AI problem. It isn't going to be solved that easily.

    2. Re:Mod parent up ! by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      Try to translate "That's so bad!" from English to Dutch and back again in Babelfish.
      The Dutch are there too? I knew the country was practically run by islamic fundamentalists but I didn't realise it had got so bad that they were conscripting for the insurgents.

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3974179.st m

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:Mod parent up ! by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Translation is an AI problem. It isn't going to be solved that easily.

      No, it won't, you're right about that.
      By the same token, I hope no one would rely on just 3 words to determine the context of a conversation.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    4. Re:Mod parent up ! by magarity · · Score: 1

      Try to translate "That's so bad!" from English to Dutch and back again in Babelfish
       
      That's nothing; try 'Slap me a side of beef with a walk through the garden'.

    5. Re:Mod parent up ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh the brilliance of Slashdot.
      How is this off-topic exactly, Mr. childish moderator ?
      This post was discussing applications of the item discussed in the article.
      I would love for Mr. Moderator to justify this vandalism.
      In fact, I think all moderators should have to submit a real justification for their mods.
      Somehow you couldn't find more deserving posts than this to paint offtopic ? You must be blind.
      Or is it the mere mention of Iraq that makes you giggle so ?

  43. Oblig. Star Trek VI reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Klingon: Don't catch any bugs! Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

  44. Bad translation by Dog135 · · Score: 1
    I'd always wanted to know how to say "Get the fuck on the ground or i'll blow your fucking head off." in Arabic.

    The problem is, it translates into:
    "Have sex with dirt or I'll have oral sex with your head which is having sex with nothing"

    He might think you're coming onto him.
    --
    "That's so plausible, I can't believe it!" - Leela
  45. sample translation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Arabic: "Praise Allah"
    Computer say: "Get the F out, these crazies are about to blow themselves up"

  46. Yeah, right... by daniil · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Look, I'm not trying to sound negative here, but unless this conflict draws really really long, I don't really believe these devices will ever hit the streets of Baghdad. All the talk about the possible use of this technology in Iraq serves only to justify all the millions being spent on these machine translation projects.

    --
    Man is a slave because freedom is difficult, whereas slavery is easy.
    1. Re:Yeah, right... by vertinox · · Score: 2, Insightful

      All the talk about the possible use of this technology in Iraq serves only to justify all the millions being spent on these machine translation projects.

      In light of the bad things it causes, war tends to have given us most of our modern day technological conveniences.

      Left to its own I would suspect the private sector wouldn't be coming up with things like the Manhattan project or even starting the internet as early as they did. (Internet being DARPA's child as a defense of transferring data after a nuclear attack)

      If tax dollars are put into universal translators and military robots, then I don't personally mind because this means that I will reap the benefits sooner than if this was left up to the private sector who will also benefit from the military's effort.

      But that doesn't mean I support the war in Iraq...

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  47. score for parent should be insightful. by Bigos · · Score: 0

    english is not my mother tongue

  48. How useful to have a Babel fish! by KevinColyer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Let's hope Douglas Adam's words re the universal translator, the Babel fish,that "Caused more and bloodier wars than anything else in history" is not prophetic.

    1. Re:How useful to have a Babel fish! by game+kid · · Score: 1

      I'd answer that question, but your reply came to me as "I, Douglas Adams, the Galactic Words Transmitter, shall wage a costly and aortic battle against your history class." I must now fight you to the death.

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    2. Re:How useful to have a Babel fish! by KevinColyer · · Score: 1

      Beware small dogs!

  49. I think i've seen this in action by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They were saying something like "Somebody set us up the bomb."

  50. Oh Great by up2ng · · Score: 1

    Just what we need, a computer turning English into "Hacking Phlegm and Flu-ish" sounding language and a "Pnuemonia-ese" to English.

    I have yet to see how it can cope with needing to change the syntax of a sentence (English is unique with its sentence structure and the ordering of the words) let alone dealing with the differences in the way everybody speaks, and do it in real time.

    It sound like there will be a lot of raised eyebrows when the computer turns "Hi, How are you doing?" into "All your base are belong to us !"

    --
    Success is not the result of spontaneous combustion, you must set yourself on fire.
  51. MASTOR will blow your mind... by digitaldc · · Score: 1

    I read another story about this technology in a Time magazine article called "5 New Things that will Blow your Mind"

    See: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1 118338-5,00.html

    "...your Pocket PC, equipped with IBM's Multilingual Automatic Speech-to-Speech Translator. MASTOR recognizes both Mandarin and English, automatically translating what it hears into the other tongue, so two people who speak different languages can have a conversation."

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
    1. Re:MASTOR will blow your mind... by game+kid · · Score: 1
      "...MASTOR recognizes both Mandarin and English, automatically translating what it hears into the other tongue, so two people who speak different languages can have a conversation."

      Combine it with an Arabic<->English translator (which I'll call BADR) and you get a rather oddly-named product that has great potential in the UN, the MASTORBADR.

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
  52. Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _humans_ by dpbsmith · · Score: 4, Interesting

    "No one in the military would make life or death decisions based on a machine translation." That's pure CYA for the first time this device gets someone killed. If a life or death decision needs to be made and the only thing you have at hand is a machine translation, what are you going to use?

    I don't know how representative of the state of the art they are, but I've been massively underwhelmed at Babelfish's ability to understand foreign-language text and by ViaVoice's ability to understand speech. I can't imagine the effect of layering machine translation errors on top of machine voice interpretation errors.

    According to href="http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200512/iraq-a rmy">James T. Fallows, "The U.S. military does everything in Iraq worse and slower than it could if it solved its language problems. It is unbelievable that American fighting ranks have so little help. Soon after Pearl Harbor the U.S. military launched major Japanese-language training institutes at universities and was screening draftees to find the most promising students. America has made no comparable effort to teach Arabic. Nearly three years after the invasion of Iraq the typical company of 150 or so U.S. soldiers gets by with one or two Arabic-speakers. T. X. Hammes says that U.S. forces and trainers in Iraq should have about 22,000 interpreters, but they have nowhere near that many. "

    Instead of doing the obvious thing--give soldiers training in Arabic and offer big bonuses for Arabic-speaking recruits--the U.S. does nothing for a couple of years and then tries to throw a cheap technical fix at the problem.

    If we must throw gadgets at the problem, why not a satellite phone linked to a big building full of human Arabic/English simultaneous translators?

  53. babelfish will! by jahknow · · Score: 1

    oblig hgttg ref, thx.

    --
    ^^
    1. Re:babelfish will! by Thud457 · · Score: 1
      "I think he means like this, Capt N008.

      Don't let the Gorn bite your ass when you beam off the ship."

      --

      the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  54. Speak Clearly by faqmaster · · Score: 1

    "I'm sorry sir, the computer didn't hear you. Please speak clearly into the barrel."

    --
    Are you...Are you some kind of genius?
    No, ma'am, I'm just a regular Slashdot reader.
  55. Oops, here's that URL again by dpbsmith · · Score: 1

    James T. Fallows

    This time I DID press "preview..."

  56. Re:Seen That Already by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 0

    Hail fnord Eris!

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  57. What a LEAP! by Ricardo · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    WOW!

    Now we will be able to invade countries and kill their people, because we need to remove their evil dictators (that we instated) as an excuse to steal (pronounced "secure") their oil.

    Without even having to understand their culture!!! ....oh wait, thats the case now.... how will this help?

    --
    Move along... there is no sig here.
    1. Re:What a LEAP! by TastyCakes · · Score: 1

      1)We didn't instate [sic] saddam hussein. We supported him against Iran (also bad bastards).
      2)Last time I checked we payed for oil. Quite a lot in fact.

    2. Re:What a LEAP! by jack_n_jill · · Score: 0

      On #2. Remember who is in Iraq on the receiving end; Halliburton, et al.

  58. let's clear up some confusion by geekpuppySEA · · Score: 4, Informative
    Trade languages don't erode the use of local languages (what's "cultural language"?) - trade languages get used because there isn't a language in common. ("No language was harmed in the making of this commercial transaction")

    On many occasions, it's been shown that if the pidgin language is used consistently around kids, they'll start using it, but just add in all this extra grammatical stuff that they expect to hear but don't - and then the language is said to become "creolized".

    Also: we don't predominantly think in language. We think in something that's more base than, and was prior to, language. Everyone always hears that decades-old, long-ago-disproven Whorfian line, that people (in the same species, with the same neurological makeup) actually think differently according to what language they speak - but no one's buying it anymore except those Psych 101 students who are going to major in elementary education instead of cognitive development.

    I'm a language dork so I feel like I HAVE to comment every time I see language stuff on /. Except for all those "it's"es where it should be "its". Those, I can let you guys have.

    --
    Intelligent Design: because MATH is HARD.
    1. Re:let's clear up some confusion by PitaBred · · Score: 1

      You don't think "differently", but you do percieve things differently because of the nuances of yoru culture, which are often exposed in language. It's not a cause, it's a correlation.

    2. Re:let's clear up some confusion by geekpuppySEA · · Score: 1
      Not exactly... Clearly, there are huge differences in culture, but the phrase "women allowed to vote" means the exact same thing in English and in Farsi*: it just elicits different reactions from people in different cultures. But this is not a difference in grammatical concepts.

      If it were, there would be concepts that are untranslatable; but these do not exist. For any word, phrase, or concept, there is a way to describe it in another language, whether or not it uses a similar number of words to express it.

      *Incongruous example (Benazir Bhutto was a female prime minister of Pakistan)

      --
      Intelligent Design: because MATH is HARD.
  59. This is a wonderful development! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I'm sure this will clear up that little misudermistanding and they'll immeadiatly stop blowing things up.

    Home by Christmas.

  60. Desktop Wallpaper by Arcidius · · Score: 1

    Will it have a picture of Linda Park (Ensign Hoshi Sato) on the desktop?

    --
    There are no stupid questions, But there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
  61. Speaking as someone who has had some experience by DG · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...I totally agree - once it works.

    I went to school in a military college in Quebec. One of its aims was to make us fluently bilingual (French and English) and a lot of effort was spent on that. All communications outside the classroom switched language every two weeks, we got 5 classes of instruction per week, and we spent two months one summer on a full-bore language training programme.

    And after 4 years of this, I was indeed fluently bilingual. (Je suis billingue)

    BUT - it took 4 years of constant immersion to get there, French and English are reasonably similar (same alphabet, mostly the same sounds, a lot of shared words, reasonably similar grammar) and I still can't do a very good job of translating. In fact, I didn't really start to be able to function in French until I was comfortable enough with it to THINK in French (pense en francias). If I think in French, I'm fine. If I have to think in english and then speak in French (or vice versa) there's a kind of mental clashing of gears; it's like the speech centre and the comprehension centre are in one place, and the translation centre is in another.

    So I can watch a French movie, no problem. But ask me to provide a running translation of the dialogue in English, and I can't do it - not without falling way behind. Translation is HARD.

    Plus, from personal experiance, trying to communicate with somebody when you share very little language is very, very frustrating - for both of you - even in the most benign circmstances. It's a stressor. Now try it when one or both participants in the conversation are in fear for their lives... it's an easy way for tempers and emotions to get stoked way high.

    And that's with French, which was relatively easy. Arabic reads right-to-left, has no shared alphabet with romantic languages, shares few sounds, and has a completely different grammar. I can't imagine how long it would take to be able to speak fluent Farsi or Pashtun - but yet, some day, my life might depend on it.

    If we can develop a working real-time translator, it's going to make a lot of people's lives a lot easier. It will be a de-escalator when it comes to conflict resolution - and by far the best way to resolve conflicts is peacefully. Ask any soldier.

    DG

    --
    Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
    1. Re:Speaking as someone who has had some experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well at least Farsi is Indo-European language and even with all the words borrowed from Arabic it _should_ be easier to learn than Arabic.

    2. Re:Speaking as someone who has had some experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pense en francias

      Calisse de saint-cyboire! T'es pas capable d'écrire "français" comme il faut, espèce d'imbécile!? Maudit que des idiots comme toi me font chier, tabarnak!

      Translation, for the french-less:
      You have a typo in "français".

    3. Re:Speaking as someone who has had some experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone trained in Arabic I take difference with the idea that it will ever work. You say immersion, but it was in a classroom setting? The US DoD language skill uses a 63 week course (40 hours per week) for arabic. That's a far cry from 4 years and Arabic is a *much* harder than French for a native English speaker to learn...

      Students are (mostly) selected for prime language ability so that compensates somewhat and of course only the exceptional are really fluent at the end of the course. On the other hand the instruction provides a very solid foundation for becoming truly fluent. Thinking or dreaming in a language you are studying is not all that difficult. I've seen plenty of references to that phenomenon as being a sign post saying "you've made it." I don't agree.

      That said, your comment about translation meshes perfectly with my experience. I could have an indepth discussion in Arabic (about politics, religion, etc.) and not be able to tell someone else afterwards more than the gist of what was discussed. For me it is one language or the other and when both are active things come out rather mixed, if at all. (It is kind of embarrasing when you try to write a check and your get brain-lock as to which way the hand should be moving.) I've had difficulties trying to explain the difference between working in a language and translating between languages. Those who do real time translation have my respect.

      In the end I disagree with you implied support of this effort. I'm not against machine translation per se, but (as someone who is also well acquainted with programming) I don't believe they will ever work past very specialized applications. And as a linguist the very factors you cite tell me that an automated translation system -- especially in a hot spot -- is a recipe for disaster.

      People are tense and nervous. An automated system such as this is going to have a limited vocabulary. It is going to have imprecise pronunciation. It is going to lack any real inflection. What you are left with is practically Robby the Robot and a person whose body language speaks of fear, anxiety and tension. That is no way to communicate and, in my opinion, will impede actual communication. In those situations being able to calm the respective parties is a necessary component of the translation process.

      Note: I no longer work for DoD and do not have any financial gain from my linguist ability. In short, I have no vested interest in protecting human linguist jobs. I am saddened, however, at the prospect that the expense of training humans as linguists and checking their backgrounds will be seen as the expensive, luxury option and that in critical situations they will cause more of a problem than they solve.

    4. Re:Speaking as someone who has had some experience by khedron+the+jester · · Score: 0

      Translation, for the french-less:
      You have a typo in "français".

      Translation from computer translator:
      We surrender!

    5. Re:Speaking as someone who has had some experience by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      The civies are going to want this stuff recorded and we won't have slaughter houses anymore.

      Good for the U.N. bad for U.S. morale.

    6. Re:Speaking as someone who has had some experience by nsasch · · Score: 1

      THINK in French (pense en francias) mais ce n'est pas 'francias', c'est 'francais' Je parle francais un peu (en classe de francais a l'ecole). je pense que je pense en francais. En anglais: But it's not 'francias', it's 'francais' I speak french a little (in french class at school) I think that I think in French. When I'm told something, I understand it without translation. But my vocabulary is too limited to properly think in French fully. I do speak though without thinking about the words and conjugation and such.

      --
      Make your computer faster: rm -rf /mnt/windows/
    7. Re:Speaking as someone who has had some experience by thomas.mcmahon · · Score: 1

      I think you're problem is in thinking that translating and interpreting are the same skill as being able to speak the language. ie. That someone who speaks both French and English will be good at translating the two languages.

      This is not actually true. Translating and interpreting are also skills. They are skills that can be taught too. I speak English as my native language, and speak German and French both fairly competently. This didn't make me good at translating or interpreting between these langauges.

      Only after doing translating subjects at Uni. did I start to increase my proficiency in this area. One thing is for sure though, I can translate a lot better than the 'Fish at altavista :)

    8. Re:Speaking as someone who has had some experience by a.ameri · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You couldn't be more correct here. I speak 4 languages pretty fluently, Persian (my mother language), English (thanks to my parents for forcing me to learn it when I was a child), Turkish (having studied in the Turkish speaking North Cyprus) and French (Oui je parle francais aussi).

      Of these, three are Indo-European languages (French, English and Persian). Grammatically, they all follow the same rules (more or less), and making sentences in them is pretty similar. The place of adjectives, verbs and nouns might change, but you are fairly confident that you will be dealing with the same structures, like nouns and verbs. Not so in Turkish which is a Turkic language and follows completely different sentence structure. In the Indo-European languages, you might use different prepositions for the same purpose, but you at least use prepositions. Not in Turkish, in which everything becomes a suffix and there are no prepositions (I have heard other languages like Finnish to be similar).

      What is the key to be able to successfully speak different languages? Just as the parent mentioned, it is to be able to THINK in it. When learning a new language, if from time to time you find yourself making some sentences in your head in that foreign language, then you are on the correct path. It shows that you mind is willing to think in that way. Thinking in your own language and trying to translate it at run-time (using a little computer jargon), is a recipe for disaster. The best you can hope for is to be a mediocre speaker.

      Adding to the difficulty of translation is the cultural weight that a language carries with itself. A Language, especially those like Persian and Turkish which are not as widespread as English for example, is a symbol of that country and stands for all that nation's aspirations, dreams and fears. You can't learn Persian without becoming familiar with some historical figures and legendary myths and Pagan beliefs that Iranians still commonly boast about. You can't learn Turkish without learning different kinds of Kebab, and drinking Ayran (A juice made from Yogurt), and of course Atatürk. You can't learn French without knowing what Café Créme is, without knowing the difference between a red from Bourgogne from one from Bordeaux, and of course without knowing the significance of the Bastille Day.

      Can a machine deal with all these peculiarities of languages? Quite frankly, unless dramatic improvements are made in artificial intelligence, I would say the answer is a resounding NO. Translation can't be done by just following some rules and using a dictionary. That approach can at best become yet another Babelfish, and we know how useful that is. Knowing a language means being able to think in that language, and machines currently don't "think". And unless there are dramatic breakthroughs in AI, I say we are decades, if not centuries away from a useful machine translator.

      I am able to fluently speak in these 4 languages, yet I become completely speechless when I am given the task of translating from one of them to the other. That's why I could never comprehend how the minds of those UN translators who translate important political speeches on the fly, work. Knowing a language certainly doesn't mean you can translate from/to it as well. Translation is an art. A machine can never be a good translator, for the same reason that a machine can never become an artistic painter, or a composer.

      --
      -- /* Those who don't underestand Unix, are condemned to reinvent it poorly */
    9. Re:Speaking as someone who has had some experience by xquark · · Score: 1

      The reason why they translate so fast is because of (but not limited to), practise
      and context. Practise for obvious reasons and context because it allows the inherit
      search space to be dramatically reduced.

      That said UN language or diplomatic language consists of rules (more context oriented
      filtering), these rules lead to patterns in the conversations. The brain is good at
      subconsciously finding patterns and making assumptions by them when they appear in
      real-world interactions.

      So when someone begins saying People's Republ... and the context of the discussion is
      say trade talks with China and the US, you know the interpreter is not going to wait
      and see if the speaker ends the sentence with China, Bangladesh or Algeria.

      --
      Arash Partow's Philosophy: Be a person who knows what they don't know, and not a person who doesn't know.
    10. Re:Speaking as someone who has had some experience by tehanu · · Score: 1

      Actually I have little trouble translating from Chinese to English and vice-versa. I have given running commentaries on HK films to English speakers and running Chinese commentary on American films to my parents (who speak only Chinese). This is probably because I grew up with both languages from when I was a baby so I naturally "think" in both languages and can easily flip-flop between the two. The second thing is I've spent a lot of time since I was a small kid translating as my parents don't speak English. I guess the key is practise.

    11. Re:Speaking as someone who has had some experience by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      "So I can watch a French movie, no problem. But ask me to provide a running translation of the dialogue in English, and I can't do it - not without falling way behind."

      Yes, it is hard, But strangely enough, I discovered some years ago that after trying to translate in real-time for foreign students (norwegian->english), I got the hang of it. Of course, there are some caveats:

      1. Norwegian is my first language
      2. I've had a lot of exposure to english from a very young age, inlcuding exchange students
      3. The language the foreign students used was not precisely english, but what you might call EFL, english as a foreign language. (They were mostly from Asia and french-speaking Africa). English as it is actually used as a foreign language is quite different from native english. I doubt my spoken english would get a very high grade. In fact, I found out that after interacting with the foreign students I started talking in somewhat simplified english myself.

      I sure couldn't have doubled for the translators who gave a real-time translation of the korean nobel prize winner's speech that year, not from any language, but at times I did manage to say words in reasonably correct english simultaneously with hearing them in norwegian, and it was a weird feeling.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  62. rumour has it... by rmallico · · Score: 1

    that it will use clippy from microsoft office fame...

    --
    sig goes here!
  63. Rogue slashdotter hacks it to translate Klingon... by Lester67 · · Score: 1

    ...in 3... 2... 1...

    (Come one, you know you want to!)

  64. remember Mars Attacks ! by dangil · · Score: 1

    remember Mars Attacks , and its alien translator ?

    just a thought...

    1. Re:remember Mars Attacks ! by Angstroem · · Score: 1

      You'll be safe, as long as you remember one thing: no birds!

    2. Re:remember Mars Attacks ! by dangil · · Score: 1

      noo... you forgot that at the end, they were shooting people, and the translator kept saying "we come in peace, we come in peace"

  65. My hovercraft is full of eels by Ranger · · Score: 1

    There were some problems with the early prototypes. Some examples:

    "How many miles to Babylon?" was translated into Arabic as "My hovercraft is full of eels."

    And in Arabic "America go home!" was translated into English "My nipples explode with delight."

    See the full transcript for the full details.

    --
    "You'll get nothing, and you'll like it!"
  66. had these in 2003 by peter303 · · Score: 1

    It takes slashdot a while to catch up, but troops were using similar devices since the initial invasion. I recall it was called the phrasolator.

    1. Re:had these in 2003 by Red+Flayer · · Score: 1

      It takes ridiculous posters a while to catch up, but phraselaters are referenced in TFA and do not have the same capabilities.

      RTFA.

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
  67. Eastern Europe by stoolpigeon · · Score: 2, Funny

    My sources tell me that this has been in heavy use by the CIA for some time, at secret installations in Eastern Europe. I guess, it took time to ramp up for Iraq as there was an expected increase in vocabulary. Apparently for the CIA the device merely had to handle screaming and whimpering of the word 'No' for the various languages in use.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
  68. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by jahknow · · Score: 1

    Good point, but with all the snooped/recorded cell traffic that's already collected from around the world, they can't hire enough Arabic-speaking analysts as it is... Now, if we 1) replaced our troops with gun-toting robots, 2) trained some of those former troops to speak Arabic, 3) linked the killbots to a building with Arabic/English translators, 4) ?????, 5) PROFIT!!! This message brought to you by Lynne Chen3y and all the fine folks at Halliburton.

    --
    ^^
  69. Kind of gay... by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

    The important thing is that these translators aren't gay. That's what really matters in America and the US military, isn't it?

    (As I've said before, I'd rather be covered by a gay guy who thought I was hot than by a homophobe who thought I was gay.)

    --

    ---
    ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
  70. Re:Seen That Already by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

    I guess there's a moderator who either has a terminal lack of a sense of humor or hasn't seen Mars Attacks so doesn't know the context of the above quote.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  71. "Prone to errors"? by Woldry · · Score: 1

    But even the best computerized translation is still prone to errors.

    No matter how good the technology of translation gets, it will be "prone to errors" for the simple reason that we don't understand language well enough to program any kind of computer to do it well.

    Even the grammars* of the best-studied languages cannot yet be adequately model and described in a way that accounts for all the uses to which people put it in everyday situations, let alone in exceptional circumstances such as war. A five-year-old native speaker of a language has a better grasp of how the language functions than the best linguists have been able to model.

    Nor can the technological obstacles be easily overlooked. Even if we had a thorough model of a single language, we would then need a point-for-point map connecting the model to an analogous model for the target languange, for a translation not to be "prone to errors". And given how quickly language changes, and given the range of variations of usage from place to place, the computational requirements for simply building a model of a single language are staggering. The requirements for mapping two complete models to each other, and for keeping up with changes in usage, vocabulary, pronunciation, and so on, are simply prohibitive under current technology.

    I dream of the day when our technology is able to perform such tasks. But until the linguists have succeeded in building a thorough, credible model of even one living language, I don't intend to hold my breath.

    Nifty idea, though.


    * By "grammar" I don't mean the rules Miss Grundy tried to drill into your head. I mean the set of (mostly unconscious) rules that a speaker uses to build an utterance and to parse the utterances of others.

    --
    How can a post be modded "overrated" or "underrated" when it hasn't been rated yet?
    1. Re:"Prone to errors"? by Woldry · · Score: 1

      Er ... for "adequately model and described" read "adequately modeled and described".

      Clearly Miss Grundy failed, in my case.

      --
      How can a post be modded "overrated" or "underrated" when it hasn't been rated yet?
  72. Sure... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "it could be useful in some carefully chosen situations."

    I do not think a combat zone qualifies as "carefully chosen situation"...

  73. I agree. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The intelligence agencies are in a sticky situation. If they don't go far enough to prevent an attack, they are charged with not having done enough. If they do go far enough and their methods become public, they are charged with going too far. The intelligence game is a tough business and if you are forced to play by the rules you are going to lose. In my opinion they should go as far as they think they need to go. Unfortunately this will probably result in some innocent people getting hurt, but in my opinion it's a simple numbers game: the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

    Granted I don't think terrorism is any more of a threat today than it was 5 years ago (at least not on our home soil), but it's worth investigating every lead if you can save a few lives here and there.

    I think it's kind of funny how Zarqawi is doing "damange control" (LOL!) about the recent bombings in Jordan. "We bombed the hotels because Americans and Israelis stay there. Sorry about blowing the shit out of those 50+ Jordanians at the wedding party and only managing to kill 4 Americans. My bad."

    1. Re:I agree. by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Preference Utilitarianism is a bad thing to use here. Your existance is decedant -- your life is fueled by enough resources to save hundreds of people from slow wasting death. Therefore, using it to justify torture is a non-sequitor.

      --
      It's been a long time.
  74. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Soon after Pearl Harbor the U.S. military launched major Japanese-language training institutes at universities and was screening draftees to find the most promising students. America has made no comparable effort to teach Arabic.

    Ask yourself what would be more difficult...

    Teaching the language of an orderly society of highly focused, cultured, philosophical, well mannered warriors and scholars.

    or

    Teaching the language of unruly, inbred, goat-humping, nomadic tribemen.

  75. It was supposed to be two-way, but... by tomcres · · Score: 1
    ...all it would translate when going from Arabic to English was "Die, Zionist-loving infidel imperialists!"

    At least they got the English-to-Arabic working though. It was stuck in beta for the longest time while they tried to figure out why "Dick Cheney" kept getting translated as "Allah."

  76. Did you mean the Babelfish, or... by Tavor · · Score: 1

    Uhura's metal earpiece? Image here. Note Earpiece in left ear.

    --
    Windows has detected an undetectable error.
  77. humans are context sensitive, machines aren't by SuperBanana · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Afterwards the US officer tells the translator to tell the police that he had to hold his fire because he did not know where they were and that they must let him know when they leave the group. Subtitles show that the translator really says something like: You idiots! You completely screwed up the mission ... So much for the diplomacy and professionalism the US officer was trying to convey.

    Body language plays a clear part in these sorts of situations. The Iraqis aren't stupid- they see the US officer saying something carefully and quietly and calmly...and then the translator starts waving his arms around and calling them idiots, I think they have a pretty good idea that the translator is full of shit, or at least that the US officer isn't the one being rude.

    Let's put it this way- if the US officer came over and started yelling and waving his arms around, and the translator says "The general wishes to express his slight displeasure with how the operation went, but asks that you honor him by coming to dinner"...do you really think they're not going to realize the translator is fluffing things?

    I strongly suspect the translator was taking the cushy-nice-guy talk which would earn the soldier zero respect, and -fully- translating it into something the Iraqi police would expect. It's like the difference between a project meeting to decide how to fix the mail server, versus a construction site. Your boss doesn't say, "hey ya stupid moron, ya dropped that SCSI disk and now we're gonna be 3 days behind! Get yer ass into the server room and if you don't have 20 machines racked by the end of the day, don't show up tomorra!", and a construction supervisor doesn't say, "Hey Charlie, how's it going? Your kid feeling better? Yeah, about backing up the cement mixer into the side of the building. Well, next time, please be a little more careful and maybe solicit Bob's help next time in making sure there's adequate clearance."

    1. Re:humans are context sensitive, machines aren't by venicebeach · · Score: 1

      This is a good point, and I would add that it's important to keep in mind how much language and culture are intertwined. Translating effectively isn't really an exercise in finding the corresponding words in the two languages. Its about finding the most appropriate way to convey the same message in the two languages. I don't really know anything about Iraqi culture, but it is certainly possible that it's not appropriate or effective for a commanding officer to give instructions in a polite, watered down manner.

      Beyond that, this is an interesting case, because we are also trusting the translation subtitles on the Discovery channel. The fact of the matter is that translation is a complex, difficult problem that does not necessarily have one best solution.

    2. Re:humans are context sensitive, machines aren't by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

      strongly suspect the translator was taking the cushy-nice-guy talk which would earn the soldier zero respect, and -fully- translating it into something the Iraqi police would expect.

      I realize the potential for cultural differences but these police are not in the officer's chain of command, they are not his subordiates. It is a joint patrol so diplomacy is required, that is also a lesson for the police to learn.

      I'm sure the US officer conducts himself quite differently when one of *his* men screws up. Actually, in a earlier episode when the unit was training at Fort Hood prior to deployment to Iraq he did get excited on an occasion or two.

  78. Translator Mix - Up by waterlogged · · Score: 1

    "I'm not sure Sargent, but I think he just said all our base, are belong to him"

    --
    I couldn't fail to disagree with you any less.
  79. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which one do Americans speak again? I'm confused. Your post seems to suggest the latter.

  80. translator != interpreter by spectrokid · · Score: 1

    When students go to translator school, they have to do a test. They get a text through headphones in their native language and have to repeat it "live" in a microphone while new text keeps on comming. Very few pass this test. They become interpreters, the others become translators. I speak five languages myself, of which 4 reasonably fluent. I will rarely make mistakes while talking to one person, but put me in a multi-language group where I have to keep on switching every other sentence and in the end I will simply adress someone in the wrong language.

    --

    10 ?"Hello World" life was simple then

  81. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by Dun+Malg · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Instead of doing the obvious thing--give soldiers training in Arabic and offer big bonuses for Arabic-speaking recruits--the U.S. does nothing for a couple of years and then tries to throw a cheap technical fix at the problem.

    Bullshit. You clearly know absolutely nothing about the subject and are pulling crap out of your ass. They already do offer bonuses to qualified recruits based on their ability to speak foreign languages. And do you really think they're not cranking out arabic linguists as fast as they can? It takes 9 months to a year to train a non-arabic speaker to speak well enough to just barely get by. It then usually takes an additional year of real-life exposure before they truly become proficient. Furthermore, the language program only takes those who score in the top 5% on their aptitude tests, and of those they do accept, fully half still wash out. You may think it's just a matter of teaching all the infantry grunts a half dozen canned phrases, but making a usable translator out of someone is a hell of a lot harder than teaching them to shoot a machine gun. This all I know, being a former soldier with the 101st Airborne (311th MI bn, "Eyes of the Eagle") and a graduate myself of the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California.

    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  82. Move along by superwiz · · Score: 1

    Nothing to see here... you know... first the computer-aided traslation that sounds computerized then ceramic armor. Next the clone army? And you always wondered why they sound so goofy in those helmets, didn't you?

    --
    Any guest worker system is indistinguishable from indentured servitude.
  83. To George W. Bush: +1, Reluctantly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear Mr. President:

    I hereby give notice of my resignation as President-VICE effective Dec. 1, 2005 because
    I have to catch a plane to my new home in Uzbekistan.

    Seditiously,
    President-VICE Richard B. Cheney

  84. "will they accept it?" vs "what sorcery is this?" by xenomouse · · Score: 1

    "The infidels have trapped the soul of an Iraqi in a sorcerer's box and are forcing him to act as a translator, thus preventing him from ascending to paradise?! KILL THEM!!!"

  85. Wrong type of translations anyway... by delcielo · · Score: 1

    What we really need for the troops are not just language tanslators; but cultural translators. Some things are easy to teach (don't address a man's wife, don't reach out with the wrong hand); but others are more difficult.

    Perhaps most difficult is how to defuse a situation after a cultural gaffe has been made.

    Multiply this even more as the issues get larger. The notions we have about self-determination are different from theirs, for instance.

    We need to understand these differences before we can pretend to give them the things they're "lacking".

    --
    Hot Damn! It's the Soggy Bottom Boys!
    1. Re:Wrong type of translations anyway... by DG · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure just how important the cultural gaffes really are. I mean, they should be avoided, and it's good to learn and pick up on local cultural idiosyncracies, but I think most people are willing to give strangers the benefit of the doubt when it comes to things of that nature.

      Don't get me wrong; better to be polite than rude. But I doubt that an obvious foreigner doing something culturally inappropriate is some sort of tripwire that leads to instant violence.

      But misunderstandings in languages definately are. Hell, it took me months just to be able to hear the breaks between French words, never mind move to understanding the words themselves. And I've been in some conversations that goes like this:

      "I'm sorry, I don't understand"

      "I'm sorry, I still don't understand"

      "Dammit, can't you see I can't understand you?"

      etc....

      You can defuse a cultural situation if you can communicate.

      DG

      --
      Want to learn about race cars? Read my Book
    2. Re:Wrong type of translations anyway... by Vintermann · · Score: 1

      In some places, cultural gaffes can be dangerous. I mean, you and me are citizens of the global village, we are aware that customs differ, and as you say we will probably give the other party the benefit of doubt. However, rural Albanians may not have thought very much about the issue at all. They might think something like "Why can't this monkey talk straight?", and it's not so many years backpackers would be pelted with stones if they entered that part of Europe.
      Suprisingly many French, British, Americans and yes, Norwegians also have the "Why can't this monkey talk straight?" attitude, and commiting a cultural gaffe can be dangerous even in civilized places, for instance if people are drunk and/or edgy.

      --
      xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
  86. and what would be the first sentence ? by jhermans · · Score: 1

    Where are the weapons of mass destruction ?

  87. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by irote · · Score: 1

    Being a translator or an interpreter is hard. Speaking a language isn't - it just requires time, and a degree of dedication.

    It does indeed take many years to train a reliable interpreter (at a minimum, a three year university degree in the language and then 1-2 further years of interpreter training), but your reference to aptitude tests highlights the second problem: your reference to "aptitude tests".

    Why bother with aptitude tests?Everyone can learn a foreign language. Or at least, anybody who managed to master a mother tongue can. The people who say they're "useless at languages" are the ones who tell themselves that they're useless: ie., they can't be bothered to apply themselves. But, immersed in a country - as a US soldier in Iraq is - and with sufficient motivation, you could very easily teach Arabic on a large scale to the officers at the very least - and possibly to the infantry as well. It's just a question of cost, but, expensive as good language teachers are, it would still only be a drop in the ocean compared to the overall cost of prosecuting this ludicrous war.

    As for motivation - I suspect that your average infantry grunt would not be hugely motivated to learn Arabic. But try this: "Making an effort in this class could very easily save your life tomorrow." I suspect that could make a big difference...

  88. Maybe we'll finally get the message... by bareman · · Score: 1

    that they would prefer for us to go away.

  89. How about a translator call center instead? by Ritchie70 · · Score: 1
    I don't know what the radio and/or cell phone infrastructure is like in Iraq at the moment (whether military or civilian) but it seems to me that it would get better transations if you just had a call center full of translators, perhaps sitting in the US somewhere, and a mechanism for people in the field to call for translations. Then you just have to issue each unit a comparatively cheap device (essentially a rugged cell phone with speaker phone.)

    It's probably easier to get English - Arabic translators if there's no chance of them getting killed....

    Just don't offshore it, nobody needs an Arabic translator with an Indian accent. (joke, folks.)

    --
    The preferred solution is to not have a problem.
  90. Do you know anything about phonetics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My guess is no.

  91. The real question is... by Ozymand+E.+Us · · Score: 1

    Will the translation come out in ogg?

  92. Sorry. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, this is the parent poster. I retract my statement, since based on further research, the grandfather post's ideas could be implemented, albeit with some difficulty.

  93. Why not learn the language? by queazocotal · · Score: 1
    I've often wondered why the soldiers on the ground aren't given a word of the day.

    Couple of weeks in, and you've got enough to do "Halt, or I shoot".

    Hmm. Combine this with a little badge, indicating knowledge of "30/100/300" words, and local distribution of word cards...

  94. As Monty Python would say... by snuf23 · · Score: 2, Funny

    "My hovercraft is full of eels"

    --
    Sometimes my arms bend back.
  95. Re:Violence is the universal language by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I agree with your points. Violence is the only language understood westerners. Their lies and hypocrisy renders any intellectual dialogue useless. This new technical mimic is bound to fail at the hands of such ignorant and self-righteous people. The only way to restore world order is to rid the world of this great scourge. In particular, through the annihilation of the white people. The up rising of the Iraqis and African French is only the beginning. As the rest of the world wake up to the atrocities of the white man, Euro up and America will be under siege once again.

  96. Good try by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the real person who posed the question if the great grandparent poster knows anything about phonetics. I still am pretty sure the person doesn't know anything about phonetics in general, or about the phonology of Arabic, in particular.

  97. Does it translate 'sorry' from English to Arabic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably not if it's owned by the military.

  98. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by natophonic · · Score: 1
    It takes 9 months to a year to train a non-arabic speaker to speak well enough to just barely get by. It then usually takes an additional year of real-life exposure before they truly become proficient.[...]This all I know, being a former soldier with the 101st Airborne (311th MI bn, "Eyes of the Eagle") and a graduate myself of the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California.

    Given that and your experience, would you say that kicking out 37+ students because they're gay is a great strategic move?

  99. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by Archimboldo · · Score: 1

    Reminds me of Jimmy Carter's visit to Poland. The translater they hired made one goof after another - something US officials suspected as they saw smiles and laughs from the audience. One gaffe I remember is that Carter said, "I have a great love for the Polish people" and it came out as "I have a great lust for the Polish people."

  100. Which Arabic are we talking about? by BibelBiber · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hey, did anybody consider that there is not the Arabic out there? When we're talking about the Arabic, it's basically a synthetic language, set up by islamic scholars sometime between the 7th and 10th century. There was so much trouble reading the Qur'an, they needed to write a prescriptive grammar and dictionary which cannot be backed up by older texts other than the Qur'an itself. This is a major problem with rabic.
    Aside from that, Arabic differs so much from one country to another, you can't just set up something to translate it. It's like saying English and German are Germanic languages, so let's make a translator from Germanic (ie Eglsih or German or Danish or dutch) to Chinese. It won't work (I'm talking about the present). Vowel qualities differ so much, there's no chance to match two regions. Heere again the problem lies with the Arabic, it's a sacred language and nobody would say he or she is talking something like Iraqi or Moroccan, they all speak Arabic. If you lose your language, you lost part of your identity.
    Okay, this looks somehow Orientalist but nevertheless, there is a problem with speaking about plain Arabic, it's a bit more complicated.

    1. Re:Which Arabic are we talking about? by cepstral-voices · · Score: 1

      Good point Bibel- A single "Arabic" voice cannot effectively communicate with even the entire Iraqi population (Sunni, Shiite, and Kurdish.) For this reason, the language dialect chosen for the project was Iraqi Arabic having a Baghdadi accent.

  101. Re:Seen That Already by myowntrueself · · Score: 1

    Actually, when I saw the article, Mars Attacks was the first thing that came to mind.

    I *know* I will be moderated troll or flamebait, but there is just something about phrases like "Do not be afraid" "we are your friends" "we come in peace!" blaring out of the 'translator' being wielded by hopped-up-on-amphetamine US troops ready to shoot anyone at the slightest provocation...

    --
    In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
  102. Using "human" loosely... by abb3w · · Score: 1

    Americans speak something in between: a language of highly focused, unruly, inbred, goat-humping, warriors and scholars. BooRAH!

    --
    //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
  103. My Hovercraft is full of heels by draxredd · · Score: 0

    Will you go back to my place bouncy bouncy ?

    --
    --- Back to the trees, back to the trees !
  104. Come you nigh? Kay shuns! by VAXcat · · Score: 1

    Terrific...life and death translations being done by a program...we'll be reading about this on comp.risks before too long.

    --
    There is no God, and Dirac is his prophet.
  105. Brilliant! by ToasterofDOOM · · Score: 1

    Let's call it "The Babelfish"

    --
    I am Spartacus
  106. Darpa? by AyeRoxor! · · Score: 2, Funny

    Funded by Darpa[...]

    I could have sworn it was funded by Durka Durka...

  107. That's all very well... by johnw · · Score: 1

    but can it translate between English and American?

  108. "Simple" problems for machine translation - Repost by dolanh · · Score: 1

    I posted this a few years ago, but I think a lot of it is still relevant:

    I used to study linguistics. It is very interesting, but also makes you feel very humble. Human language has far more subtleties than most people credit it with. It is true that if you're a Chomskian, you will tend to see languages as more similar than different (the opposite of most non-academic views). However, even if you do believe in Universal Grammar and all that the idea entails, it has to be said that there are some fundamental difficulties in machine translation. As I'm not in the field, I don't know if they've been solved yet, but I imagine they haven't reconciled the:

    1) Differences in language syntactic structure. How do you reconcile a VSO language with an OSV language and still maintain real-time processing? More specifically, if, in, say, language 1 one would form a sentence like "John buys milk" (Subject-Verb-Object, like English) but in lanuguge two you would say "buys milk John", how do you begin to immediately translate, word for word, when the words are not in the same order? Answer is, you don't. The longer and more clausal the sentence gets, the more or a problem this becomes. This assumes the translator is going to have to decide where to pause so it can rearrange the sentence, parse and translate it. This is fine, except that:

    2) Natural speech doesn't necessarily follow the same rules as written language. So the speaker many not speak in nice, neat, parseable chunks. So the translation machine has to start making some decisions. For the benefit of the doubt, let's say that we're going to pause nicely after each complete sentence to let the translator do its work. You still have the problem of:

    3) Context. A.k.a. the "frame" problem (to some degree, though not exactly). Computers have no context w/ regards to language (they have no actual experiential knowledge of meaning), and thus have no concept of relevance (if you believe in Relevance theory pragmatics). They have no basis upon which to "guess" at word meaning or pull meaning out of inferential utterances -- no basis which to understand sarcasm, humor, hyberbole, or anything your lit professor taught about -- and here's the kicker folks, all of that plays a role in figuring out meaning, which is usually the tiebreaker in any case of:

    4) Ambiguity. Wonder why Babelfish only works half the time? Because idiomatic expressions exist. Because words are ambiguous -- one word can have multiple meanings and multiple words can mean the same thing. One word can have different meanings to different people. (BTW, if you want to explode your head, just *begin* to study semantics).

    This will probably be another "nobody will ever need more than 16k of RAM" quote, but I think we'll have a hell of a time getting machine translation up to human standards until the machine is thinking for itself. Not that i'm arguing it can't be done, it's just not as straightforward as L&H, or IBM, or the Office of Naval Research would have you believe.

    see http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/01/19/222221 3 for original

  109. Clearly . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have multiple personality disorder.

  110. This would be helpful for the Hearing Impaired by brandonp · · Score: 1

    I would imagine that this would help someone who is Deaf enjoy a speech or gathering without requiring an interpretor. Intepretors aren't always available and this would allow them to attend any speech without having to schedule it far in advance. It would just need to translate the speech into text, instead of a translated voice. Kind of like a real life portable Closed Caption machine.

    Obviously this wouldn't help a hearing impaired person in a social setting since they would need a way to communicate back, since the device only interprets voice.

    But I think that would be a really cool use of something like this, it would definitely open a few more opportunities for the hearing impaired.

    --
    Brandon Petersen
    http://www.brandonpetersen.com/

  111. What??? by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 1

    Is this a reference to some infuriating computer game where you have to do all sorts of nonsensical random activities before it lets you progress?

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
    1. Re:What??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's how you get the Babelfish in Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, so yes, it's part of the solution to an evil, nasty, cruel and outright mean program that kills you off on a whim if you didn't do some random, fanciful, inane activity that you were supposed to way back at the beginning of the game.

      Which reminds me, I should go feed the dog a sandwitch...

  112. Non-Obligatory, Offtopic... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Non-Obligaroty, Offtopic Family Guy Reference

    "Holy crap! Uhura's black?"

  113. explanation for "bite the wax tadpole" by No+Such+Agency · · Score: 1

    It's okay, some of us get the reference :)

    PS: everyone else, Snopes has the scoop.

    --
    Freedom: "I won't!"
  114. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Arabic is not that easy to learn, it makes learning german or french look like a walk in the park. A Staff Sgt from my unit spent 3 years taking arabic classes, because if he passed the test, he would have gotten a $50,000 bonus. He failed miserably, as did 95% of his classmates.

    The only way to get truly good at arabic is to learn it while very young.

  115. Soldier's perspective by mansa · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm stationed in central Iraq, and think this software would be great as a backup tool. I've never used this hardware, so I can't comment on how well it really works.

    At the moment, I'd stick with my Iraqi 'terps for day to day operations. I have 9 working for me now, I trust all of them. Typically they're screened by a US Company, and are pretty smart guys who love their country.

    Where they prove to be extra valuable is when they use their "Arab-sense". They can tell where people are from by the way they talk, or look. They know the difference between Iraqi and Syrian Arabic... and even between cities in Iraq. They're great at defusing situations, and act as my eyes and ears when working with locals/Iraqi soldiers. They are also able communicate my intent without directly translating my words. Sometimes a direct translation isn't the best way to go, as it can be confusing. If needed, they can further clarify what I'm trying to convey. That's why I like to call them my 'terps, instead of translators. Strict translation may be OK in certain situations, but when you're in a hot situation having someone interpret can be necessary.

    1. Re:Soldier's perspective by jack_n_jill · · Score: 0

      You had better hope that they love your money more than their country! They are betraying their country. They are helping unwanted invaders make a success of the occupation. They are fighting for George Bush and not for Iraq.

    2. Re:Soldier's perspective by mansa · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I couldn't disagree more. The coalition is here to rebuild Iraq's military and police force... that exactly my job here. The 'terps want Iraq to be a strong, self sufficient country and they see what we're doing is making a difference. They thank us for being here... and they're not even getting paid that much. 90% of them are college graduates, and instead of trying for a more "civilian" job, they're out here in the shit with us.

  116. Which Arabic? by zalamito · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There are 22 Arab countries in the Arab League. Not a single dialect is similar to the other. And nobody speaks the classical Arabic taught at schools!

  117. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by Rorschach1 · · Score: 1
    If we must throw gadgets at the problem, why not a satellite phone linked to a big building full of human Arabic/English simultaneous translators?

    Because it'd doubtless be outsourced to India and then no one would understand what's being said.

  118. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
    Being a translator or an interpreter is hard. Speaking a language isn't - it just requires time, and a degree of dedication. It does indeed take many years to train a reliable interpreter (at a minimum, a three year university degree in the language and then 1-2 further years of interpreter training),

    Current military training already only turns out people at proficiency level 2 on a scale of 1-5. It takes 10 months to a year to train an arabic linguist to this bare minimum level. That's just the way it is. It's arabic, not mexican spanish.

    but your reference to aptitude tests highlights the second problem: your reference to "aptitude tests". Why bother with aptitude tests?Everyone can learn a foreign language

    Anyone can learn a foreign language, provided it's not TOO foreign, like French or German, and they have the time to study. You can't lump all foreign languages together. Not everyone can learn chinese, pashtun, arabic, or farsi quickly enough and proficiently enough to make training them in it worthwhile.

    Or at least, anybody who managed to master a mother tongue can.

    I'd argue you've just disqualified a full sixty percent of potential applicants. You need some grasp of basic grammar concepts before you can even begin, and most people don't have that.

    The people who say they're "useless at languages" are the ones who tell themselves that they're useless: ie., they can't be bothered to apply themselves.

    I watched a half dozen dedicated soldiers apply themselves like crazy to the Russian language, and that didn't keep them from washing out. You might argue that they were being made to learn too quickly, but the course took a YEAR to get us up to the bare minimum level 2 proficiency. Arabic is at least the equal of Russian in difficulty. Positive thinking and happy thoughts aren't enough.

    But, immersed in a country - as a US soldier in Iraq is

    But they're not immersed, they're only exposed. "Immersion" is when you basically force people into a "sink-or-swim" situation. US soldiers in Iraq spend the majority of their time in the company of their own fellow soldiers, not walking around the streets of Baghdad trying to get a job, a meal, or an apartment.

    you could very easily teach Arabic on a large scale to the officers at the very least

    When are we going to teach them? At ROTC or OCS? And how do you know they're going to end up in Iraq(arabic) and not Afghanistan(pashtun)? Like I said before, Arabic isn't mexican spanish and there's a lot more to language proficiency than learnign to ask "how much for the beer" and "where's the bathroom". It takes the better part of a year to learn Arabic well enough for it to be useful.

    and possibly to the infantry as well.

    You've clearly never spent a lot of time with the infantry. Most of them are disqualified under the "anybody who managed to master a mother tongue" requirement. Some of them already barely speak english as their second language.

    It's just a question of cost, but, expensive as good language teachers are, it would still only be a drop in the ocean compared to the overall cost of prosecuting this ludicrous war.

    Actually, it's a question of resources, only ONE of which is money. They already don't have enough instructors. For Languages like pashto and uzbek, there exists no teaching materials at all, only a few obscure papers by linguists in the late 1800's. The resource that is lacking now is time. Time to find and train instructors, time to build the curriculum, time to teach the students.

    As for motivation - I suspect that your average infantry grunt would not be hugely motivated to learn Arabic. But try this: "Making an effort in this class could very easily save your life tomorrow." I suspect that could make a big difference...

    Man, you obviously never spent ANY time with the infantry! Every single bit of training for them is

    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  119. At last a benefit for the arab (or their language) by systems · · Score: 1

    this seems like the first obvious or direct benefit for us Arabs, a new technology that serves us, goood work, give somemore, arabize emacs.

    Anyone feeling jealous!


    Okay, that last bit was a funny. No offense anyone.

  120. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by nappingcracker · · Score: 1

    I've been massively underwhelmed at Babelfish's ability to understand foreign-language text and by ViaVoice's ability to understand speech.

    Do not forget this is DARPA, they have nearly unlimited resources in both money and brains (dont tell the zombies)

    the U.S. does nothing for a couple of years and then tries to throw a cheap technical fix at the problem.

    This translator has most likely been in development since the idea of voice recognition, and is now good enough that they feel they can deploy it with better than dead success. (with Arabic!, a true feat, check other posts on the differences between the languages, and then try to apply that to an already complex program. I bet this thing could rip through any latin based language with the appropriate DARPAtalk(tm) package.)

    Instead of doing the obvious thing--give soldiers training in Arabic and offer big bonuses for Arabic-speaking recruits--the U.S. does nothing for a couple of years and then tries to throw a cheap technical fix at the problem.

    Few people want to be soldiers now. There is a hot war. I agree that having human translators like the old (original) human artillary computers would work quite well, and they could probably get recruits if the language recruits were guaranteed service in the US or EU or some place with less deadlyness. Training humans also takes a lot of time and money, probably not as much as building the machine, but you only need to build "one" machine and keep improving on it, vs retraining a human over and over [obviously].

    For some half ass numbers for context, take the 22,000 translators necessary, say they know no Arabic, train them for 4 years at a good language school for ~160,000 tuition, multiply by 10 for the government pricing rule (1 person getting the goods takes 10 support people to get the goods to that person, this figure may be (and probably is) higher). 22,000 * 160,000 * 10 == 35 200 000 000. Yes, these are semi-arbitrary numbers, and not all translators would need the full training, etc, but it is still a large investment into something that will eventually retire, quit, turn, or die.

    The real score is that this tool will be great for sucking up communications anywhere, anytime to check against patterns that are interesting to the government. This will be good and bad, but hopefully in time will end up in some robot that will help you do the dishes. Or it will ask you for your papers. Probably both.

    --
    |plastic....or gasoline?|
  121. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
    It takes 9 months to a year to train a non-arabic speaker to speak well enough to just barely get by. It then usually takes an additional year of real-life exposure before they truly become proficient.[...]This all I know, being a former soldier with the 101st Airborne (311th MI bn, "Eyes of the Eagle") and a graduate myself of the Defense Language Institute in Monterey, California.

    Given that and your experience, would you say that kicking out 37+ students because they're gay is a great strategic move?

    No, I'd say it's fucking stupid, but I'm not in charge of military sexual orientation policy. I do, however, understand their position. The military doesn't want to be used as a platform for activism because it compromises it's primary purpose: to wage war. The military is a very disciplined institution. It forbids a lot of things among them walking around shouting "I'M A GAY SOLDIER!" Frankly, the real problem is people who can't just do their god damn job without telling everyone about their sex lives:

    She mastered Arabic but couldn't handle living a double life under the military policy known as "don't ask, don't tell." After two years in the Army, Glover, 26, voluntarily wrote a statement acknowledging her homosexuality. Confronted with a shortage of Arabic interpreters and its policy banning openly gay service members, the Pentagon had a choice to make."

    Christ almighty, since when is keeping your private life to yourself "living a double life"? Among my DLI classmates were three guys everyone knew were gay. Hell, two of them shared a room and constantly bickered like an old married couple! But nobody cared because that was entireley irrelevant to our common job as soldiers, and none of them turned in a signed "confession" of their homosexuality to the CO. Doing that and griping about the result is just dumb. Anyone who does that has to know that they're basically asking for a discharge. The "don't ask, don't tell" policy is about the best compromise the brass can come up with right now. I predict that'll change in the next 20 or so years, once the "stigma" of homosexuality starts to fade, and it'll be absorbed into the already existing rules forbidding overt expressions of sexuality while in uniform; but until then, there just too much socially conservative inetia to do that.

    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  122. p.s. by Intelligent+Design · · Score: 1

    For those who want more info on the polls see http://www.iraqanalysis.org/info/55. Note the first one by the UK's ministry of defence which shows that 65% of iraqis actually support attacks by insurgents on british troops. Also note the systematic bias in the IRI reports, which you can read about here.

    1. Re:p.s. by Kafka_Canada · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the laughs!

      --
      Fuck it
  123. Wouldn't they just train the soldiers by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    on what to say to make the translater speak properly?

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  124. Will it by anything like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Darpa Darpa, Muhamad Jihad.

  125. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by Dun+Malg · · Score: 2, Informative
    James T. Fallows, "The U.S. military does everything in Iraq worse and slower than it could if it solved its language problems. It is unbelievable that American fighting ranks have so little help. Soon after Pearl Harbor the U.S. military launched major Japanese-language training institutes at universities and was screening draftees to find the most promising students. America has made no comparable effort to teach Arabic. Nearly three years after the invasion of Iraq the typical company of 150 or so U.S. soldiers gets by with one or two Arabic-speakers. T. X. Hammes says that U.S. forces and trainers in Iraq should have about 22,000 interpreters, but they have nowhere near that many. "

    James T Fallows is comparing apples and oranges. 1) this is not 1942. We don't have a huge pool of eager, patriotic draftees fresh off a decade of depression looking for purpose in their lives.
    2) this is not 1942. The military has little leverage on college campuses in general, and is unlikely to find the professors teaching southwest asian languages willing to cooperate with them.
    3) this is not 1942. We aren't concentrating on breaking coded military communications by a traditional army in a war with clealy defined front lines. We're trying to root out a loose confederation of miltant religious extremists living and operating within the countries we've already conquered. We need to be able to talk to the locals, not just listen in to the enemy's phone calls. Subsequently, we don't have just one language to deal with. The military needs not only Arabic, but Pashto, Dari, Azgari, Uzbek, Turkmen, Berberi, Aimaq, Baluchi, Basha Indonesian, Urdu, Turkic, and Persian Farsi linguists.

    His attempt to compare A) the monumental task of finding qualified instructors for obscure languages, developing curriculum for the courses, and teaching these extremely difficult languages that (in some cases) don't even have an alphabet; and B) getting a bunch of people to learn, or finding people who already speak, a common and (relatively) widely known language like Japanese; well, the attmept is basically idiotic.

    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  126. Do you speak it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "English motherfucker! Do you speak it?"

  127. Potential Fiasco by triso · · Score: 1

    Lets hope this doesn't turn out like the "The Hungarian Phrasebook sketch." "My hovercraft is full of eels," indeed. See http://www.serve.com/bonzai/monty/classics/TheHung arianPhrasebookSketch for details.

  128. Funded by Durpa Durpa Durpa by Laconian · · Score: 1

    Hakk, derp derp Allah!
    Durpa Durpa, Muhammad Jihad!
    Hakka sherpa sherpa, a-backkhala!

  129. Unnecessary! by jack_n_jill · · Score: 0

    Isn't torture the universal language?

  130. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by jack_n_jill · · Score: 0
    If a life or death decision needs to be made and the only thing you have at hand is a machine translation, what are you going to use?

    What are you talking about, "what are you going to use?" The answer is; your gun. In Iraq, American policy is that a bullet is the universal language!

  131. Watch out for Freak Wormholes!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is of course well known that careless talk costs lives, but the full scale of the problem is not always appreciated.

    For instance, at the very moment that Arthur said "I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle," a freak wormhole opened up in the fabric of the space-time continuum and carried his words far far back in time across almost infinite reaches of space to a distant Galaxy where strange and warlike beings were poised on the brink of frightful interstellar battle.

    The two opposing leaders were meeting for the last time.

    A dreadful silence fell across the conference table as the commander of the Vl'hurgs, resplendent in his black jewelled battle shorts, gazed levelly at the G'Gugvuntt leader squatting opposite him in a cloud of green sweet-smelling steam, and, with a million sleek and horribly beweaponed star cruisers poised to unleash electric death at his single word of command, challenged the vile creature to take back what it had said about his mother.

    The creature stirred in his sickly broiling vapour, and at that very moment the words I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my lifestyle drifted across the conference table.

    Unfortunately, in the Vl'hurg tongue this was the most dreadful insult imaginable, and there was nothing for it but to wage terrible war for centuries.

    Eventually of course, after their Galaxy had been decimated over a few thousand years, it was realized that the whole thing had been a ghastly mistake, and so the two opposing battle fleets settled their few remaining differences in order to launch a joint attack on our own Galaxy - now positively identified as the source of the offending remark.

    For thousands more years the mighty ships tore across the empty wastes of space and finally dived screaming on to the first planet they came across - which happened to be the Earth - where due to a terrible miscalculation of scale the entire battle fleet was accidentally swallowed by a small dog.

    Those who study the complex interplay of cause and effect in the history of the Universe say that this sort of thing is going on all the time, but that we are powerless to prevent it.

  132. Why? by Dr.+Eggman · · Score: 1

    Why not have the machine preprogrammed with a list of common phrases, ect. that you can select in english and it'll speak in a phrase in Arabic prechecked by a professional translator back at the factory and use the voice translater as a backup function for extreme/uncommon situations?

    --
    Demented But Determined.
  133. Think in French by Pseudonymus+Bosch · · Score: 1

    You must think in French to steal one of those secret mind-controlled Mirages.

    --
    __
    Men with no respect for life must never be allowed to control the ultimate instruments of death.
    GW Bu
  134. Quebec by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    ...I went to school in a military college in Quebec...


    ahahahahahaha

  135. hmmm auto language translation huh? by MaTriXxx1 · · Score: 1

    We would like to allie with your troops beep... beep... beep... beep... You want to do WHAT with our mothers?? you sick american pigs! WAR!!!

    --
    Do NOT goto this URL http://www.forthesims.com
  136. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by Aaron+England · · Score: 2, Informative

    I can speak to how hard this is. The Arabic course is actually 63 weeks, with an additional 4 more months at Goodfellow AFB, TX. I was a former Russian linguist. I say former linguist because I washed out of the course with 2/3 of the class (yes only a 1/3 ended up graduating). Learning a language isn't hard, but the pace they are trying to teach it to you at is. It's OK though, I got reclassied into a much cooler job and I'm much happier with it.

  137. The first message to be (in)correctly translated by empvirus · · Score: 1

    "Can you hear me now?"

    --
    Sometimes I comment just to hear myself typing.
  138. Oh the irony by smutt · · Score: 1

    So is the US government finally admitting they don't understand the people they're displacing and killing. If they could have admitted that in the first place maybe we wouldn't be in this mess.

    I see this as being indicative of a much larger problem with American imperialism. The US has the biggest army and sends it out the most to fight wars. But the US also has one of least internationally informed populaces.

    Language is life people. How can we expect to help Iraqis if we can't even communicate with them without interpreters. And to all those people who complain about interpreters screwing stuff up. I've seen it first person as I am bilingual. I've acted as an interpreter before and it's tough. After a couple of hours you just want everyone to shut up.

    Interpreters and gadgets aren't the answer. The only answer is daily cultural and language training for the troops stationed in Iraq. But they're burdened enough as it is. Maybe they should just leave and let the Iraqis figure it out?

    --
    The Information Revolution will be fought on the command line.
  139. Speaking from experience with this method. . . by NOPteron · · Score: 1

    and many others, PLEASE try http://www.pimsleur.com/ language-training. . .

    The diff is night||day. . .

    This works by training one's brain the way babies learn the bits of language: individual-sounds, sylables, and associating meaning with sound-forms in one's automatic words brain/mind.

    Not the industrial-era gigo+roteLearning "training" that is usual in language-"education".

    --
    IPTables enhancement Fail2Ban bans cracker-login's
  140. Hehe by Nicholas+Hill · · Score: 0

    We will bury you

  141. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The fact that our most highly trained military linguists often don't have enough discipline to keep their sex life to themselves reflects on the quality of those who are charged with selecting and training them. The military is rotten from the top down. Perhaps you are not, but the system you are sworn to is.

  142. how many ways to say "I steal your oil" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "I steal your oil"

    "I crush your chest after torture"

    enuf sed.

  143. Re:Bad substitute for Arabic _training_ for _human by Vintermann · · Score: 1

    "Arabic is at least the equal of Russian in difficulty."

    I'd wager it's a lot more difficult, actually, since russian is indoeuropean, and arabic is not.

    You're totally right, though. People just don't grasp how difficult learning languages is. If they did, those "teach yourself russian in 20 easy lessons" courses wouldn't sell...

    --
    xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.