[Note: this was originally a post in the Phantom thread, this post was just a discussion with digipl about nitpicks on the translation. Most of the suggestions are agreed by digipl, but the last point reopened how to translate “Safe Network”: was “network” a common noun or “Network” a proper noun? This small difference would determine if it gets translated or not, and if it gets translated it may impact adoption. ]
@digipl “theme” se traduce “tema”?
No sería más apropiado “tapiz” o “estilo”?
Si bien literalmente sea correcto, me pregunto si no será típicamente interpretado por un lego con la acepción de “asunto”.
Btw, propongo modificar “guay” por “genial” para hacerlo más neutral.
Sino tendríamos que incluir regionalismos para cada país, en México se diría “chido/padre”, en argentina “copado”, en Venezuela “chévere”, en Cuba “bacán”, etc… esto sería una pesadilla.
Un comentario sobre “Unpublished draft”, si bien me parece absolutamente acertado la traducción a “borrador inédito”… en otras aplicaciones se encuentran traducidos como “sin publicar”.
Por cierto, yo sigo pensando que Safe Network debería ser considerado un brand sin traducción. @bochaco vos qué pensás?
Imagínense si Microsoft Windows hubiese sido traducido Microsoft Ventanas.
I am no brand dude, but I recon SAFE network will be shortened to SAFE in any case when in general use. I think the word SAFE is probably not trademark-able so I like that aspect. So probably SAFE network in writing etc. but SAFE being bold and what fill say. Then as folk say I was on SAFE they will be asked what is that? and they may then say, “the SAFE network”, this global community of privacy and security innovators built it to keep the planets data safe. It means “Secure Access For Everyone” it’s really great.
The concern is not really about getting trademarked or about having the rights, ownership and stuff like that.
But about being recognizable and discoverable in the early stages of getting the word around.
If I were telling laypeople that they should use ‘SAFE’ because it is awesome, if my pitch piques their curiosity they would like to learn more about it by typing ‘safe’ in a search engine; and they would end up drowning in a sea of products and services that has nothing to do with the network I was trying to promote.
Having an identifiable name is about reducing ambiguity, so the word gets spread around without friction.
If I tell people about the “Safe Network”, they would get the right result on the top in their first attempt. No matter the language used in my pitch.
For translators there is a big difference between “SAFE Network” (a network called SAFE Network) vs. “SAFE network” (a network that is called SAFE).
If “network” is not part of the name, it will be translated to their respective languages, and the efficacy of the search will be extremely disconcerting, completely unrelated to our project. There is a big difference between searching “red SAFE” vs “SAFE Network”.
A seemingly minute and insignificant decision such as deciding for ‘Network’ or ‘network’, will either help or become a hindrance to get adoption, in my opinion.
So true. The product really needs to have a more unique and less confusing name. It’s not too late, imo, to reconsider how this is going to be publicized. Since the best identifier, “SAFEnet”, is already taken we should actively be seeking a replacement that is:
I also hope we can avoid confusing branding and naming. A name should be easily spelled and inflected in writing in different languages. A logo can be a memorable picture that doesn’t need to be inflected, capitalized etc. E.g. multiple capital letters should be avoided in a name unless they form an acronym.
I don’t necessarily agree that the SAFE name needs to be changed (and wrong thread to debate it), it was good enough for a top 5 market cap spot a few years back. Attractive enough for Disney, HBO, BBC, Forbes, Guardian, and a host of others.
So what has changed?
Nothing really (other than an alts bear market).
And that is just an energy change, which can change back again.
Did the big media (branding and comms experts) say, oh, you really need to change the name of your project by the way?
Do a search for “Safe Network” and you’ll see. This is what newbies will be faced with when they first learn about SAFE. Very confusing. Like I said earlier, not unique, not trademarkable (apparently) and not simple when you consider the effort required to separate the wheat from the chaff.
I just think the probability of confusion at launch is great enough to cause concern now. 99% of the early adopters have not even heard of SAFE yet. That is why I say it is not too late to reconsider branding and naming. That, seen in tandem with the issues surrounding the other “Safecoin”, should be enough, imo, to at least take a long, hard look at possibly pivoting on the branding front.
Gemalto is a leading global provider of data protection. Around the world, Fortune 500 global corporations and government agencies turn to Gemalto’s SafeNet Identity and Data Protection solutions to secure and protect their most valuable data assets and intellectual property.
I was one of those who proposed a rebranding a long time ago, for the exact same reasons…
But now it seems that the term “Safe Network” (as a whole) became unique enough to get the first results in search engines, which is now strongly linked to MaidSafe’s project. So there isn’t really a need for a rebranding.
But if we turn “Network” to “network” it will once again become generic, especially when translated to other languages.
As an example, try searching these terms:
“Red SAFE” (Spanish), “SAFE网络” (Mandarin), “SAFE 네트워크” (Korean), “Сеть SAFE” (Russian)
Compare that with “Safe Network” both in Bing, Google even local search engines such as Naver.com (Korea), Yandex.com (Russia) or Baidu.com (China).
“Safe Network” is uniquely identified in all search engines, and it points to sites and articles related to MaidSafe’s SAFE network.
So why don’t we leverage that, by officially adopting “Safe Network” as the complete name?