I can compare it to nothing but a large door mat, ornamented at the edges with little tinkling tags — that was one early reviewer's verdict on machine output. A decade on, the mat has become considerably smarter, and the question we hear is whether human translators still have a job.
Short answer: yes, but the job changed. Neural engines draft fluently in high-resource pairs, which moved our value upstream — into terminology design, cultural adaptation, and the final review that catches the confident-sounding error no algorithm flags.
Where machines shine
High-volume, low-risk content — internal tickets, user reviews, draft gists — is genuinely well served by engines with light human post-editing. Our Express tier uses exactly this hybrid to hold the $19 price point without sacrificing readability.
Where people remain essential
Contracts, medical guidance, brand voice and anything a regulator will read still need qualified native speakers and a second pair of eyes. Fluency is not fidelity — and only a specialist reviewer can tell the difference.
Our position is simple: use AI where it helps, verify where it matters, and never let an unreviewed draft touch your customers. That balance is built into every plan we sell.
Key takeaways
- AI drafts well; humans guarantee meaning and tone.
- Hybrid workflows keep routine content affordable.
- High-stakes text always gets full human review.