For those of you that are bilingual...
-
Often, when I translate from English, I will put the result into the source side and translate it back to English. Do that a few times and you'll have your answer. ऐसा कुछ करें और आपका जवाब होगा। (Hindi) Do something like this and your answer will be.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
Many years ago, there was a web site where you could supply an English phrase and a list of languages. The website would call Google translate to translate the phrase to the first language, and then back again to English. The result was translated to the second language, and back, and so on to the end of the list. Some times the end result was laughable, sometimes shocking (with the meaning completely reversed), sometimes it made no sense at all. (If this web site, or a similar service, is still in operation, I'd very much like to know the URL - I lost it years ago.) On the more serious side: All textbooks for Technical Writing courses state as standard procedure that when you have a text translated to a language that you do not fully master yourself, then you should always have another translator translate it back to the original language. The wording may be different, and doesn't even have to be "correct" in grammar or style, but at the abstract level, the contents should be the same. (But remember that mis-translations may also occur in the second step.) In the pre-google age, printed manuals in the user's own language were common. I have worked with a couple companies that followed this practice: The proof prints were also sent to a publicly authorized translator for back translation, before the big printing press started rolling.
-
But sometimes you have to. Amazon, for instance, won't list things in "foreign" countries unless the app is available in that language.
We won't sit down. We won't shut up. We won't go quietly away. YouTube, VidMe and My Mu[sic], Films and Windows Programs, etc. and FB
-
David Crow wrote:
I use Google Translate to translate words to/from English. From what little I know of other languages, I think it does a good job.
It proves to me that there is little to nothing to fear from AI if that's what it is based on. "Turkey", the meat, gets translated to Turkey the country.
David Crow wrote:
The person, however, needs to know the context in which a particular phrase will be shown, as I guess that makes a difference.
Google Translate does not recognize context, as above example shows.
David Crow wrote:
This makes me wonder if an actual person is better suited for the job.
Depends; does this person translate using the Google website? :) 15 Google Translate Fails That Will Make You Never Trust Computers Again[^] 10 Inexplicable Google Translate Fails[^] --edit It seems that a lot of documentation on both the Microsoft as well as the Google website are done using "automatic translations" (from English to local gibberish). It doesn't have to be perfect or even decently readable; it's cheap to do and available for free.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
It seems that a lot of documentation on both the Microsoft as well as the Google website are done using "automatic translations" (from English to local gibberish).
Not necessarily, or rather: What makes you think so? Especially computer related documentation, and most of all: in free software, with help texts, labels, menus etc. translated by volunteers, the translators have their brains running in "English mode", selecting a translation that is as close to the original phrasing as possible, and sometimes even closer... Several new words have come into Norwegian because translators found it easier to make an English word "look Norwegian" than to find the well established Norwegian term. Example: "outdated" was in my schooldays translated to "foreldet" (literally: too old), today the common translation is "utdatert". It feels "wrong" to bring in the date to indicate that something that never had a date has turned too old! The old, but outdated (!), Norwegian term was a lot better! (If you explicitly want to indicate that some time/date limit has expired, you can of course do that, too.) Another example: "Error message" translated to "feil melding" (a very common translation by volunteers) means "wrong message". The proper translation is "feilmelding", in one word. I have argued fiercly with some of those guys who insist on translating it as two independent words! But far more often, the "translated" words have no root in Norwegian, they just "look Norwegian". The only way to make sense out of them is to recognize their English origin, which is usually very simple, and mentally read the "Norwegian" word as if it was translated properly to Norwegian. But if you can do that, why do you need a translation at all?
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
It seems that a lot of documentation on both the Microsoft as well as the Google website are done using "automatic translations" (from English to local gibberish).
Not necessarily, or rather: What makes you think so? Especially computer related documentation, and most of all: in free software, with help texts, labels, menus etc. translated by volunteers, the translators have their brains running in "English mode", selecting a translation that is as close to the original phrasing as possible, and sometimes even closer... Several new words have come into Norwegian because translators found it easier to make an English word "look Norwegian" than to find the well established Norwegian term. Example: "outdated" was in my schooldays translated to "foreldet" (literally: too old), today the common translation is "utdatert". It feels "wrong" to bring in the date to indicate that something that never had a date has turned too old! The old, but outdated (!), Norwegian term was a lot better! (If you explicitly want to indicate that some time/date limit has expired, you can of course do that, too.) Another example: "Error message" translated to "feil melding" (a very common translation by volunteers) means "wrong message". The proper translation is "feilmelding", in one word. I have argued fiercly with some of those guys who insist on translating it as two independent words! But far more often, the "translated" words have no root in Norwegian, they just "look Norwegian". The only way to make sense out of them is to recognize their English origin, which is usually very simple, and mentally read the "Norwegian" word as if it was translated properly to Norwegian. But if you can do that, why do you need a translation at all?
Member 7989122 wrote:
But if you can do that, why do you need a translation at all?
I don't, but when I land on a Dutch MDSN-page or related, I'll quicly be looking to change the language back to English.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
I suggest you don't. I have seen goggle translates firefighter into literally a man who gets into a fighting with fire, lol.
Cue Metallica...
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
"Turkey", the meat, gets translated to Turkey the country.
Nope: "Ik heb kalkoen en chips gegeten." :)
-
Most of the times the automated translations are barely readable and, worst of all, ambiguous. If the languages have differing sentence structure then it becomes garbage (Japanese to Italian is hilarious). Automated translations are easily recongnized and they immediately tarnish the quality of the product.
GCS d-- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
I read about computer translations when I was a teenager, 40+ years ago. In those days, it was essentially used by military "intelligence", to classify documents as "worthy of having a translator make a proper translation of it" or "probably void of interesting information". Sometimes, I use Google Translate in a similar manner. E.g. if I consider buying a BD movie, I piock up the subtitles from a subtitle website to get an idea of what the movie is about. Some of those "artsy" or "anthropologic" movies may lack subtitles in a language I master, so I pick one of those avaliable and use Google Translate to give a rough idea. I do the same when I hear songs that I like, for its musical qualities, when I cannot understand the lyrics: Often, I can search up the lyrics in the original language, but with no translation available. Then, Google Translate can give me enough clues so that I get a rough idea what the song is about. Also, when some reader makes comments e.g. at YouTube in a language I do not master, I can roughly understand what his comment saying. In cases like that, literary quality is not essential, and Google Translate will do the job well enough. But I leave it at that. Also, when Google Translate cannot help me, or I suspect that it gives me the wrong translation, I frequently use Wikipedia: I look up the term in Wikipedia of the source language, and then switch to the destination language (or another language that I master). For certain classes of words this is far more reliable, like flower/plant and animal names, religious terms etc. Obviously, the word-by-word translation is so time consuming that I can do it only for specific terms, not for the entire text. But it gives me a guarantee that I do not choose a crazy translation: You will immediately see that "lead" in "lead guitar" does not translate to "bly" in Norwegian :-). Even though "steel" in "steel guitar" is the metal, it is not so with "lead guitar".
-
I read about computer translations when I was a teenager, 40+ years ago. In those days, it was essentially used by military "intelligence", to classify documents as "worthy of having a translator make a proper translation of it" or "probably void of interesting information". Sometimes, I use Google Translate in a similar manner. E.g. if I consider buying a BD movie, I piock up the subtitles from a subtitle website to get an idea of what the movie is about. Some of those "artsy" or "anthropologic" movies may lack subtitles in a language I master, so I pick one of those avaliable and use Google Translate to give a rough idea. I do the same when I hear songs that I like, for its musical qualities, when I cannot understand the lyrics: Often, I can search up the lyrics in the original language, but with no translation available. Then, Google Translate can give me enough clues so that I get a rough idea what the song is about. Also, when some reader makes comments e.g. at YouTube in a language I do not master, I can roughly understand what his comment saying. In cases like that, literary quality is not essential, and Google Translate will do the job well enough. But I leave it at that. Also, when Google Translate cannot help me, or I suspect that it gives me the wrong translation, I frequently use Wikipedia: I look up the term in Wikipedia of the source language, and then switch to the destination language (or another language that I master). For certain classes of words this is far more reliable, like flower/plant and animal names, religious terms etc. Obviously, the word-by-word translation is so time consuming that I can do it only for specific terms, not for the entire text. But it gives me a guarantee that I do not choose a crazy translation: You will immediately see that "lead" in "lead guitar" does not translate to "bly" in Norwegian :-). Even though "steel" in "steel guitar" is the metal, it is not so with "lead guitar".
And I used it to set a complex system from the only documentation available, which was in Russian. Yet I won't ever sell a product with UI (or documentation) translations machine made if I don't want to act and look like a perfect fool and the product to look like crap :D
GCS d-- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
It seems that a lot of documentation on both the Microsoft as well as the Google website are done using "automatic translations" (from English to local gibberish).
Not necessarily, or rather: What makes you think so? Especially computer related documentation, and most of all: in free software, with help texts, labels, menus etc. translated by volunteers, the translators have their brains running in "English mode", selecting a translation that is as close to the original phrasing as possible, and sometimes even closer... Several new words have come into Norwegian because translators found it easier to make an English word "look Norwegian" than to find the well established Norwegian term. Example: "outdated" was in my schooldays translated to "foreldet" (literally: too old), today the common translation is "utdatert". It feels "wrong" to bring in the date to indicate that something that never had a date has turned too old! The old, but outdated (!), Norwegian term was a lot better! (If you explicitly want to indicate that some time/date limit has expired, you can of course do that, too.) Another example: "Error message" translated to "feil melding" (a very common translation by volunteers) means "wrong message". The proper translation is "feilmelding", in one word. I have argued fiercly with some of those guys who insist on translating it as two independent words! But far more often, the "translated" words have no root in Norwegian, they just "look Norwegian". The only way to make sense out of them is to recognize their English origin, which is usually very simple, and mentally read the "Norwegian" word as if it was translated properly to Norwegian. But if you can do that, why do you need a translation at all?
Member 7989122 wrote:
What makes you think so?
On MS it's stated at the top of the page ;P
GCS d-- s-/++ a- C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- ++>+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
-
Trilingual is even funnier. I've noticed some really weird translations between Swedish and German, that simply didn't make sense. That is, until I translated from German to English, and then to Swedish from English. Then I could see how it happened. I've tested it several times since, it seems like Google translate is using English as an in between language.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Try to translate Norwegian "postoppkrav" to Swedish - it comes out as "TORSK". "Postoppkrav" first goes to English - correctly - as "Charge On Delivery", commonly abbreviated COD. Then COD is translated as if it were the fish "cod" to Swedish, but with casing preserved. Earlier, Google could translate English numerals to French up to forty seven, but forty eight was translated to 48 :-) That is fixed now, though.
-
I use Google Translate to translate words to/from English. From what little I know of other languages, I think it does a good job. I'm curious, though, if it would be good enough to translate the UI components of an app that I am working on. In times past, I would simply send the file needing translating to a team of actual linguists who would turn the words/phrases/messages/titles into their respective language. As far as I can tell, that has always worked. The person, however, needs to know the context in which a particular phrase will be shown, as I guess that makes a difference. I've noticed over the years that if I translated, say, ten individual words from English using Google Translate, I would get ten words back in whatever language I was interested in. If I took all or most of those ten English words and had them translated as a sentence, I would get something different in return. This makes me wonder if an actual person is better suited for the job. Thoughts?
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
I am bilingual, and am also pretty comfortable with 2 additional languages. I can tell you that you absolutely need a human doing the translation for you.
Nish Nishant Consultant Software Architect Ganymede Software Solutions LLC www.ganymedesoftwaresolutions.com
-
A few years ago, we used automatically translated web pages as party entertainment: Everyone was given a paragraph from the "Norwegian" translation, and the first one to guess the original meaning earned points. The one who had earned the most points in the end, won a prize. For some paragraphs, noone ever managed to back-translate it, or make any sense of it.
-
Many years ago, there was a web site where you could supply an English phrase and a list of languages. The website would call Google translate to translate the phrase to the first language, and then back again to English. The result was translated to the second language, and back, and so on to the end of the list. Some times the end result was laughable, sometimes shocking (with the meaning completely reversed), sometimes it made no sense at all. (If this web site, or a similar service, is still in operation, I'd very much like to know the URL - I lost it years ago.) On the more serious side: All textbooks for Technical Writing courses state as standard procedure that when you have a text translated to a language that you do not fully master yourself, then you should always have another translator translate it back to the original language. The wording may be different, and doesn't even have to be "correct" in grammar or style, but at the abstract level, the contents should be the same. (But remember that mis-translations may also occur in the second step.) In the pre-google age, printed manuals in the user's own language were common. I have worked with a couple companies that followed this practice: The proof prints were also sent to a publicly authorized translator for back translation, before the big printing press started rolling.
Member 7989122 wrote:
but at the abstract level, the contents should be the same
A very long time ago, in real life, whilst in Chemistry Graduate School, I kept failing my German proficiency exam. This was odd, as I was at a conference in Europe and on the way back home, passing through Oktober Fest, I discovered my return-trip partner had passed the exam. Odd, because I spoke German, even whilst a bit smashed, whilst he was totally clueless. Later, I found out that my efforts to translate the entire scientific paper in the allotted time were the problem. They counted mistakes more than quantity. I did half as much the next time I took the exam and rechecked it - and passed. This makes sense - as implied in your post, a lot of wrong information is worse then a little good information. [Except, of course, in the current era as regards to News Reporting]
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein
"If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010
-
I use Google Translate to translate words to/from English. From what little I know of other languages, I think it does a good job. I'm curious, though, if it would be good enough to translate the UI components of an app that I am working on. In times past, I would simply send the file needing translating to a team of actual linguists who would turn the words/phrases/messages/titles into their respective language. As far as I can tell, that has always worked. The person, however, needs to know the context in which a particular phrase will be shown, as I guess that makes a difference. I've noticed over the years that if I translated, say, ten individual words from English using Google Translate, I would get ten words back in whatever language I was interested in. If I took all or most of those ten English words and had them translated as a sentence, I would get something different in return. This makes me wonder if an actual person is better suited for the job. Thoughts?
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
I have worked as a translator for ~15 years. I have translated UIs and have managed the translation of the UI in a large-scale product. I can tell you with 100% certainty that you do not want to use Google to translate your UI if you want to appear even remotely professional. That is because - as has been pointed out - Google has no idea of context. Many words have a lot of different meanings. Just take the example of the word "right", which, depending on context, will have a lot of different translations. There is no way that Google can decide on the right translation. It will simply choose one of the many options that are possible. So it's very possible that your users will see things like "Access Rights" as "Access legal entitlements" or something similar. As you can tell, that will only make your users question your sanity. When we sent out the UI to be translated, we were always extremely wary of translation agencies who would send back 10s of thousands of strings without having a single question about context. That's when we knew they were poor and we switched to a new translation agency. It's a surprising truth that a lot of translation work is outsourced to Google translate, and then reviewed by a human (or in some cases not). These translations are by and large useless. In some cases we had to refuse payment because of lack of performance by the agency. We were perfectly capable of running the strings through Google ourselves; that's not what we were paying for. This is a big issue because a UI will includes lots of single words (buttons, headers, menu options) that require translation, which means there is absolutely no context to go on if you look at just that one word. That's why you expect the translators to send you a long list of questions about those strings where multiple translations are possible depending on context. It's also why I documented many of the strings to clear up these questions a priori wherever possible. You can test this yourself. Take a sentence, any sentence, and enter it into Google translate. Then translate it into a language of your choice and back into English. A lot of the time, it sort of makes sense, sometimes it makes perfect sense, sometimes it's gobbledygook. Some language pairs work better than others, some sentences work better than others. Now enter the same sentence, and translate it from English to Spanish, then to French, then to Arabic, then to Chinese, and then back to English. You are guaranteed to get complete gibberish. Next, do the same
-
I use Google Translate to translate words to/from English. From what little I know of other languages, I think it does a good job. I'm curious, though, if it would be good enough to translate the UI components of an app that I am working on. In times past, I would simply send the file needing translating to a team of actual linguists who would turn the words/phrases/messages/titles into their respective language. As far as I can tell, that has always worked. The person, however, needs to know the context in which a particular phrase will be shown, as I guess that makes a difference. I've noticed over the years that if I translated, say, ten individual words from English using Google Translate, I would get ten words back in whatever language I was interested in. If I took all or most of those ten English words and had them translated as a sentence, I would get something different in return. This makes me wonder if an actual person is better suited for the job. Thoughts?
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
A few years ago I had been told we needed a Spanish translation for the large application that I had written in English. I started out manually copying every English word or phrase from the app and pasting it into Google Translate and then pasting the Spanish translation back into the app. Using the time measured for each translation cycle I determined that given the number of translations needed that it was going to take weeks to complete this task! Then I wrote some code that searched the entire source code for text and wrote it into a file. Then I wrote another program that went through the list of text and automatically retrieved translations from Google Translate and added it as another column in the file (csv). Then my app used the translation list to get the translations during run time. It looked great to me but when I gave the app to a Spanish speaker to evaluate I was told that the Spanish translations were very bad and sometimes silly/funny. My translation file was subsequently given to a translator. They had to change only about 10% of the Spanish. It made things a lot faster for the translator to have 90% of the text being already OK. Unfortunately, Google (and Yahoo too I think) did something to block me from using their translator in this automated way. Too bad, it was very useful.
-
I use Google Translate to translate words to/from English. From what little I know of other languages, I think it does a good job. I'm curious, though, if it would be good enough to translate the UI components of an app that I am working on. In times past, I would simply send the file needing translating to a team of actual linguists who would turn the words/phrases/messages/titles into their respective language. As far as I can tell, that has always worked. The person, however, needs to know the context in which a particular phrase will be shown, as I guess that makes a difference. I've noticed over the years that if I translated, say, ten individual words from English using Google Translate, I would get ten words back in whatever language I was interested in. If I took all or most of those ten English words and had them translated as a sentence, I would get something different in return. This makes me wonder if an actual person is better suited for the job. Thoughts?
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
The problem I've come across is the structure of the languages with respect to variable substitution. You want to plunk somebody's name down in the middle of a sentence in English, but in some other language it's somewhere else. That's the part where I think a human is still superior, if you can train the translator to produce the string with the variable embedded. If you're o.k. with doing that yourself, I think Google Translate does a good first-cut job. In QA, your native (language X) speaker looks things over, suggests tweaks, at which point it should just be changing a resource file/database/however your strings are abstracted.
-
I use Google Translate to translate words to/from English. From what little I know of other languages, I think it does a good job. I'm curious, though, if it would be good enough to translate the UI components of an app that I am working on. In times past, I would simply send the file needing translating to a team of actual linguists who would turn the words/phrases/messages/titles into their respective language. As far as I can tell, that has always worked. The person, however, needs to know the context in which a particular phrase will be shown, as I guess that makes a difference. I've noticed over the years that if I translated, say, ten individual words from English using Google Translate, I would get ten words back in whatever language I was interested in. If I took all or most of those ten English words and had them translated as a sentence, I would get something different in return. This makes me wonder if an actual person is better suited for the job. Thoughts?
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
I wanted to watch a movie on Netflix the other day that had the word "thirteen" in the middle of the title. I didn't want to type the whole thing so I just typed "13". I got back titles with "13" and "thirteen". I also got titles with a "supernatural" (i.e. "unlucky 13") flavor. I thought that was pretty good; though a person from another culture might not. Same "context", different expectations? It's fair to say that "context" needs to be properly "initialized".
"(I) am amazed to see myself here rather than there ... now rather than then". ― Blaise Pascal
-
I use Google Translate to translate words to/from English. From what little I know of other languages, I think it does a good job. I'm curious, though, if it would be good enough to translate the UI components of an app that I am working on. In times past, I would simply send the file needing translating to a team of actual linguists who would turn the words/phrases/messages/titles into their respective language. As far as I can tell, that has always worked. The person, however, needs to know the context in which a particular phrase will be shown, as I guess that makes a difference. I've noticed over the years that if I translated, say, ten individual words from English using Google Translate, I would get ten words back in whatever language I was interested in. If I took all or most of those ten English words and had them translated as a sentence, I would get something different in return. This makes me wonder if an actual person is better suited for the job. Thoughts?
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
-
I use Google Translate to translate words to/from English. From what little I know of other languages, I think it does a good job. I'm curious, though, if it would be good enough to translate the UI components of an app that I am working on. In times past, I would simply send the file needing translating to a team of actual linguists who would turn the words/phrases/messages/titles into their respective language. As far as I can tell, that has always worked. The person, however, needs to know the context in which a particular phrase will be shown, as I guess that makes a difference. I've noticed over the years that if I translated, say, ten individual words from English using Google Translate, I would get ten words back in whatever language I was interested in. If I took all or most of those ten English words and had them translated as a sentence, I would get something different in return. This makes me wonder if an actual person is better suited for the job. Thoughts?
"One man's wage rise is another man's price increase." - Harold Wilson
"Fireproof doesn't mean the fire will never come. It means when the fire comes that you will be able to withstand it." - Michael Simmons
"You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." - James D. Miles
I'm a little late, but I just stumbled over a MSDN page that auto-translated a class description over to german. Unfortunately, the technical descriptions - some of which were written in short term - turned up mangled and confusing. But, worst of all, the translation also included the method names! X| I don't know whether MSDN uses Google translate or it's own translation service, but I do not believe that a technical description can be easily translated automatically, unless it is very verbose. And, of course, you need to make sure that any symbols are excluded from translation...
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)