| I agree with your observation about "Interpreter" vs. "Translator." When we first started this project, we referred to it as an "interpreter." However, after speaking with human interpreters and considering their feedback, we settled on "real-time translation". We might have left some of our past on the internet tho.. As with everything, there are both advantages and limitations to text-based translations. Here are a few: Limitations: - Some people may find it challenging to follow gestures and expressions while reading. - In more one-way scenarios, such as presentations and webinars, hearing the speaker’s voice often feels more natural. Pros: - Many users actually prefer text because it allows them to hear the speaker’s original voice and pick up on nuances. - Having a written record enables post-meeting summaries and the opportunity to repurpose transcripts into other materials, such as blog posts, custom user manuals, JIRA notes, and more using AI. - There are also technical constraints with voice-to-voice translations, which currently tend to be turn-based rather than real-time (streaming) - not ideal for exchange of ideas. That said, we are excited to see how the TTS and STT technologies evolve and are looking forward to experimenting with “interpretation” in the future! |