We've had machine translation for a while and I don't think anybody particularly thinks of it as a bad thing? Writing something and then having a machine directly translate it (possibly imperfectly) is a lot different than a machine writing the thing.

Personally I would like people to try learning other languages more (it's hard but rewarding) but you can't learn every language ever, and it is really hard to learn a language to fluency.

> We've had machine translation for a while and I don't think anybody particularly thinks of it as a bad thing?

Not all, but some machine translators can be comically (if not horrifically) bad sometimes. Search Twitter-become-X for examples. Native writers can't pick a working machine translator unless they are explicitly allowed to do so themselves.

I think it makes perfect sense.

But that a site might still want to discourage it, to avoid general degradation. It is a tradeoff.

If someone can write in the target language, just not well, a model could be asked to point out problems for the writer to fix. Rewrite a difficult sentence.

I suppose for me, it is the difference between a true “translation“ and having an LLM reinterpret intent and state “its” words.

Ideally, I want the speaker’s words translated “verbatim” to English, to the extent possible.