As topic, it’s just an open subject about usage of localised and internet based translation services with dialog mode, where it listens and translate any heard speech.
Now this could be as useful, in principle, in radio as it can be in telecommunications. Some of them are incredibly tolerent of noise too, so being even more useful where implemented.
Now I realise there’s plenty of arguments for/against such things, on many subjectivity diverse levels, but I’m more looking at the compliancy based arguments.
Technically, the playback of the translation counts as a recording as far as it’s a stream of consecutive strung phonemes sequenced into an audio stream goes. So under some licenses, it’s automatically not legal to use the outgoing robot dialogue as sent audio, but it’s legit under such ruling to actually mimick the phrasing and words heard on the resulting translation of your intended response/over.
But under some rules in licensing, it’s actually considered as a form of third party messaging which is prohibited under applicable licenses.
So, on a level where licensing rules fail to meet the advancement of technology and any ethical consideration, where do you feel whole things sits?
In my mind, I can support arguments that the robot generated translation of your over shouldn’t be directly sent unless you have normal use of speech synth tech due to disability - but using the audio translation to guide your dodgy attempts to spoken converse in another language, ■■■■ I think it’s in the spirit of both consideration and respect of others.
As for TPM claims - most TPM use definitions are as grey and muddy in context as often out of context with current needs. So I play the TPM game by ear and use best judgement.
So, it’s open for you lot to discuss such stuff, or not
puts plenty of fire extinguishers and fireproof clothing on standby