• Page 1 of 2
  • 1
  • 2
  • >

Articles tagged "internet"

A truly multilingual web?

A unanimous decision last night by ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers which regulates the naming system for websites, to permit domain names to be written in scripts other than English, is being heralded as a new era of international web use.

Traditionally, domain names have been restricted to 26 characters in the Latin alphabet and could include ten numerals and a hyphen. Critics have long argued that this was unfair on groups whose languages did not use English characters. In many ways this is true – is it really fair to expect someone in China with a Chinese keyboard to figure out how to input English characters so that they could visit a website in their own country? Absolutely not. Similarly, it is hard to justify forcing someone in Israel or in Saudi Arabia to transliterate the names of companies or organisations just so that they can get a website.


Promotional video from ICANN explaining internationalised domain names (Source: http://tinyurl.com/y8oehy3).

Part of the reason for this, as I have written about before here, is that the Internet, like computers in general, has its origins in the largely monolingual, English-speaking engineering community of the United States. There’s nothing wrong with this – they had to start somewhere although thankfully, these days, multilingual issues are usually considered from the start of development projects.

Things have changed, however, and computers are now a global phenomenon as is the Internet. In fact the Internet, more so than any other modern invention, is a truly global entity and it is only right that everyone should be able to use it in their own language. So from this point of view, ICANNs decision to permit Internet domains to be written in Arabic, Chinese, Hebrew, Korean, Hindi and various other non-Latin scripts is timely and to be commended.

But I can’t help wondering whether this decision might actually prove to be counterproductive, at least in the short to medium-term. Think about it. Up to now, English speakers have had it easy, no matter what website they wanted to access, regardless of what country the site was hosted in they simply typed in the address using Latin characters. Good for people with English keyboards but not so good for those who didn’t who had to figure out how to input Latin characters on their computers.

From now on, people will be able to access websites with names written in their own languages and they won’t have to bother with complicated foreign characters. But wait a minute. Whereas before, people only had to contend with Latin characters – and like it or not, English is still something of a lingua franca so quite a lot of people are at least familiar with the characters – now they are going to have to deal with Arabic, Chinese, Korean, Hebrew, Hindi and who knows how many other writing systems.By permitting different countries to use different writing systems for their domain names, ICANN have made the process of accessing websites from around the world much more complicated unless someone comes up with some form of domain name translation service to allow people to type in phonetic versions of website names and be brought to the correct website. Even then this wouldn’t solve the problem for people who don;t know how to pronounce foreign language characters.

I know I’m probably on my own in thinking this and I also know that this might be seen rather cynically as sour grapes that English has just lost its dominant position on the Internet (honestly, that’s not it), but what worries me now is that the new rules, while undoubtedly democratic and beneficial in many ways, will ultimately fragment the Internet by causing people to stick to those websites whose names they can actually type into their computers. Surely there must be a more practical solution?

Instead of reinforcing the Internet as a “worldwide” infrastrctural resource, by bowing to pressure to cater for national linguistic preferences means the authorities have lost sight of what the Internet is about and set the scene for numerous regional Internets, effectively making the Internet world smaller.  There are rumours that ICANN had no real choice but to approve the new internationalised domains because thefear of provoking a split in the international web community which would see the creation of new, separate and independent Internets, thus seeing its authority disappear. The only real benefactors as I see it are the domain registrars who will make a fortune registering billions of new domain names. I can’t be the only one to wonder what the next big counter-intuitive idea will be. Can I?

  • Share/Bookmark

, ,

1 Comment

Nice try but I think I’ll translate it myself

The New Scientist is singing the praises of a new add-on for the Firefox browser which I’m guessing is supposed to challenge the dominance of Google in the browser-based machine translation market or at least provide an alternativet. Billed as the “Universal translator for web browsers” the World Wide Lexicon Toolbar is available from the Mozilla website and is claimed to make it much easier to translate web pages from one language into another. According to the Mozilla site, the add-on automatically detects the language of the website you are visiting and translates it into the default language of your browser.

The World Wide Lexicon Toolbar at work supposedly

The World Wide Lexicon Toolbar at work supposedly

No big deal, you might say, the Google toolbar already does something very similar (although it’s not automatic). But apart from being automatic, the add-on first offers human translations from other toolbar users, then it offers translations from machine translation services including Google, Apertium and others. Sounds really good, doesn’t it? It would be if the thing actually worked! I installed it and visited a couple of high profile German websites and nothing. Absolutely nothing. No automatic translation, not even an attempt at a manual translation. I even went to the Google.de website thinking, how hard can that be? There are only about three dozen words on the page but still nothing.
Now I know it’s only an “experimental” lemon, I mean, add-on but the developers really could have put a bit more effort into this. There’s an old saying about doing the little things well but this add-on doesn’t do anything at all except add some really ugly buttons to my toolbar. I also think the suggested $10 donation they are asking for is a bit cheeky considering it just doesn’t work. Until they get their house in order I don’t think Google will have anything to worry about. If I ever get the thing working, I might revisit it here.

  • Share/Bookmark

, ,

No Comments

STOP SHOUTING AT ME!

Say it, dont spray it!

Say it, don't spray it!

An office worker in New Zealand has been sacked for sending emails in block capitals, in a case that shows that the Internet too has its own culture and norms, and woe betide anyone who doesn’t respect this. Vicki Walker was forced out of her job as an accountant at a healthcare company after colleagues complained that her emails were too “shouty” and confrontational. Apparently she had sent emails with sentences which were entirely in capitals, sometimes bold, sometimes red or blue. Her defence was that she merely wanted to make sure that people understood what she was saying. Her employers, however, told a tribunal that she spread disharmony among her co-workers. Here is just one example from her emails that was presented to the tribunal: “TO ENSURE YOUR STAFF CLAIM IS PROCESSED AND PAID, PLEASE DO FOLLOW THE BELOW CHECK LIST.

Questionable grammar aside, this is nothing if not an eyesore, the visual equivalent of slapping someone about the head with a pair of dirty old underpants. The employment tribunal, however, found that although she had caused friction in her office and created something of a bad atmosphere, she had nevertheless been unfairly dismissed, not least because the company did not have a written style guide for writing emails. It’s not clear from the reports whether she was issued with a formal warning before being dismissed, but I have to say she should most definitely have been cautioned and sent on a sensitivity or communication course.

There was a time when I used to look at discussions on newsgroups and wonder why people would get so wound up by messages consisting almost entirely of capital letters. Nowadays I can see the point. It’s really, really, really annoying. Usually the best place to see the Caps Lock key abused so blatantly is on discussion forums when people are discussing highly emotive subjects. But I think some people either forget or do not realise that writing in capitals really is the online equivalent of standing on a table and screaming your head off. Some people just don’t care. It is a symptom, though, of a general inability on the part of a huge proportion of the population to communicate electronically. I’ve lost count of the number of emails I have received, from customers, colleagues and students which at best read like an SMS message and at worst like something from the Da Vinci Code. Some people seem to think that the ease and speed of electronic communication is carte blanche for informality and general laziness.

With written electronic communication, because there are no visual, non-verbal cues to aid communication (remember that the vast majority of normal communication relies on these cues) even the slightest deviation in expectations or conventions can spontaneously take on hugely complex and frequently inaccurate meanings. I’m still taken aback at emails that start “Dear Jody Byrne” – I don’t really know why I do but it makes me feel objectified and spoken down to, even though it’s probably because people don’t know whether I’m a “Mr.” or a “Ms.” on account of my first name. But everything you write, every comma, exclamation mark (in Germany they tend to come in threes and have been known to spark panicked stampedes of crazed urgency) and word in an email can be interpreted in any number of ways and without the visual cues to put it into context and help eliminate the incorrect interpretations, they become amplified and sometimes blown out of all proportion.

But writing in capitals, apart from being downright rude, irritating and the sign of a poor writer, can actually have the opposite effect to what the culprit is aiming for. You see, when we read, we don’t read each individual letter in a word, we recognise the word by its overall shape (unless of course it’s a word we don’t already know). Now the meaning of each word is stored along with a graphical representation or shape in our long-term memory. The way our brains work is that if information has a graphical association, we can retrieve it much more quickly than if it has no such association. In writing words in capitals you are destroying this graphical image which helps us recognise the word and retrieve its meaning. This means we have to analyse each word, letter by letter. The net result is that instead of instantly recognising a sequence of words, you’ve presented readers with something that’s harder and more time-consuming to read and increased the chance of readers not understanding it properly. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot. Writing in capital letters is reminiscent of that clichéd character you used to see in English sitcoms where, when confronted with someone who didn’t speak English, the character would usually speak much, much louder and much more slowly as if the person’s inability to understand was due to them being both deaf and stupid.

Ways to stop shouty emails - No. 231

"Ways to stop shouty emails" - No. 27

There are so many things that people find irritating about electronic communication that it makes you wonder whether the time has come to do something about it. I think a good starting point would be to recall all computer keyboards and surgically remove the Caps Lock key. There is a way of disabling it using your computer’s registry but I think the symbolism of physically removing the keys and melting them down is pretty important. (I also think we should stop email programs having the ability to compose HTML emails too because this only encourages people to add colour to their uppercase missives and apart from being pointless, they take up bandwidth unnecessarily). If, after removing the Caps Lock keys, people persist in assaulting us with badly spelled (spellcheckers tend to ignore uppercase words) uppercase nonsense, the offenders should be glued to a giant Caps Lock key and driven through the streets on the back of a donkey and cart. Problem solved!

  • Share/Bookmark

,

No Comments

How not to stop Internet pirates

A better option than criminalising ordinary Internet users?

Clouseau would have better luck than these daft new proposals

A recent report in the Independent newspaper in England outlined the government’s plans to put the onus on ISPs to help track down people who illegally download copyright material such as music and films. Under the scheme, Internet companies would be responsible for identifying and reporting illegal downloaders who then face large fines and having their access to the Internet withdrawn among other things. In all honesty, this has to be one of the daftest ideas I have heard in a long time. Surely it would be much better to go after the people who upload the illegal files in the first place? First off, there are fewer of them so it should be easier and cheaper to catch them. There’s also the fact that in order to rent the space on a web server where you can store the files, you need to provide your name, address and credit card details. Now I’m no criminologist but I’d imagine that this would be pretty much all you’d need if you wanted to send a police car around to pick up some evil wrong-doers. The current approach is a bit like turning around and saying that you’re only going to concentrate on catching drug users and not the dealers, presumably because drug dealers are but humble shopkeepers.

Illegal downloads have also made an appearance in the translation industry, albeit to a lesser extent. I once had a student bound excitedly into class saying that he had found a “really cool website where you can download Trados for free”. Intrigued, I asked him about the site. He said “yeah, once you get past the porn ads and the pop-ups there’s this link…”. What the student had found was a crackz site. Nothing to do with drugs, crackz are hacked versions of software with the licence mechanisms removed or bypassed so you can, in theory at least, use the software for free. Software like Trados has long been a favourite and it goes to show that even translators with their impeccable moral standards can be tempted. At one point a few years ago crackz were so prevalent that I actually had to incorporate them into my technologies course. Not because I agree with them but because of the hidden dangers of using crackz. The problem with these sites, as my student found out is that they are usually riddled with all sorts of viruses, malware and ads for pornography.

Computer piracy: It's not all rum and wenches

Then, even if you do manage to get past the flurry of boobs and other body parts, the software you download can contain Trojan horses which will do all sorts of bad things to your computer from stealing information to turning it into a zombie computer ready for the next large-scale, headline-grabbing assault on some high-profile Internet target. So by saving a few quid on downloading free software you could kill your computer and probably get yourself put on some FBI watch-list. Not worth the hassle really, is it?

Still, you can see why some people are tempted by offers of free software. The sheer price of many products can often seem unreasonable. Of course a lot of time and effort goes into developing these applications and companies don’t develop products for the hell of it. However, some companies are so bloated in terms of workforce and bureaucracy that their prices are artificially inflated. In the current economic climate you have to wonder whether this is a sensible way of doing things.

The long and the short of it is that piracy isn’t cool, it’s theft and by downloading files you are robbing people of well-earned payment, recognition and possibly even their jobs. Also, by stealing stuff you are hitting yourself somewhere else – in the case of music, your favourite band may get dropped before they get to their second album or you’ll get stung with exorbitant ticket and merchandise prices; in the case of software there’ll be less choice, more expensive support and training. Either way, you’ll be hurting yourself. But having said all that, companies could do more to understand why people feel it’s ok to download illegally and look at their pricing structures. People aren’t inherently criminals, so why turn them into that?

  • Share/Bookmark

,

No Comments

Is Facebook checking up on me?

Whos watching you?

Who's watching you?

For several months I’ve been growing increasingly puzzled at some of the people Facebook has been suggesting as friends. Sometimes it’s almost as if Facebook is psychic because it suggests people as friends who I know in real life but with whom there is no apparent connection online. Originally, Facebook would suggest friends of friends just on the off-chance that you might have some friends in common. This is fair enough, but recently I’ve noticed that Facebook is getting a little too on-the-money with the people it suggests. For example, it suggested the daughter of a colleague as a friend even though my colleague isn’t on Facebook. It has also suggested a couple of notable translation scholars which isn’t too earth shattering given that I’m a member of a translation-related group on Facebook and I feed my blog onto my profile page. Some of this can be easily explained by the fact that Facebook searches through your stated interests, groups, favourites etc. and suggests people who have the same interests as you. But today it made two suggestions, a recruitment consultant and an education website, with whom there is absolutely no connection on Facebook. The only connection is that the recruitment consultant’s name appears once on JodyByrne.com, and my name appears once on the education website. Now, the only way I can see that Facebook could make these suggestions is if it were searching the Internet for my name, comparing any names it finds on those pages against its list of members and then suggesting them as potential friends.

In a way I feel like some crackpot conspiracy theorist who thinks he’s figured out who killed JFK or what really happened at Roswell but I definitely feel uncomfortable about this and ever so slightly violated, and not in a good way. I know there’s absolutely no such thing as privacy on the Internet (especially if you’re an academic and especially if you use Facebook) but I don’t think I like the idea of Facebook basically checking up on me. Call it profiling, researching or spying but I’m fairly sure there’s a privacy issue here, or at the very least, an issue of informed consent and transparency on the part of Facebook as to how they come up with these suggestions and how exactly they use your information.

  • Share/Bookmark

, ,

1 Comment

  • Page 1 of 2
  • 1
  • 2
  • >