Main Page Contact Register Log In


Duolingo could have the text translated and then donate the translations to the companies that need them. That way the utility to the user could be preserved. But if the company receiving the translation should pay for them why should not duolingo when it receives them form the users? It's also that low value because companies do not want it. If they would want it they would pay real money for it. Crying over that selling products that customers don't want isn't viable is not about injustice but poor choice of product.

Duolingos forums were quite clueless on how the business model works and the website doesn't handily present such information. They also go forward with a lot of emphaisising bringing language skills to poor countries. At least some of the translators might take on the task thinking that the translation is used to enable such poor country education. it would be good if they do inform and the "cure" would be for them to inform more, but there are some indicators to suspect that the business model isn't common knowledge among the participants.

When language exercises are the same text over multiple students there is more control over on vocabulary and the level of challenge. Presenting a proper challenge curve makes for a smoother learning experience. In exchange for having real world impact there is a tradeoff of it being somewhat more cumbersome to use as a learning tool. Because the utility is so low even small drawbacks need to be tracked to be informed of the overall balance. If a user would not use duolinog they would use text spesifically prepared to be used in language learning. In getting constantly new text translated it would be way more diffcult to ensure the same level of learnability value of real texts.

I am somewhat uncomfortable on the tone of you making unilateral accusations of ill will. Also if I make arguments that don't win you over they obviously don't work but it is redundant to say that over "I disagree". I am afraid that you are stopping argument and starting name calling and other non-cognitive activities. While I might be motivated to discuss matters I have no interest to work as a demon for you to rage at. Please be aware taht there are people with differing beliefs than you and that this in itself is not an error state.






If you ask Duolingo to pay minimum wage you not only argue for more than just paying the people.

Also if I make arguments that don't win you over they obviously don't work but it is redundant to say that over "I disagree"
No. There are good arguments that are not strong enough to win me over but which as still rational arguments.

If we would have this discussion on LW your posts would be strongly downvoted for not engaging in rational argument.
When Omnilibrium fails to filter in that way, that's an issue that separate from disagreement. I'm used to LW standards of discussion and the goal of the Omnilibrium project was to keep them.
They also go forward with a lot of emphaisising bringing language skills to poor countries.
Duolingo actually manages to do that.

When language exercises are the same text over multiple students there is more control over on vocabulary and the level of challenge. Presenting a proper challenge curve makes for a smoother learning experience. In exchange for having real world impact there is a tradeoff of it being somewhat more cumbersome to use as a learning tool.
Duolingo actually gives users specifically prepared exercises as default and allows the user to translate real world texts as an additional feature. It forces nobody to translate texts to use it.

Again here the problem isn't disagreement. It's that you try to rationalize your position instead of engaging in informed arguments.

30 hours of Duolingo equal roughly one semester of language courses in a Western university. Duolingo likely provides a better learning experience then the other choices a poor African has.
61%
ChristianKl
stars0
Replies (1)