They can't even translate their site to 'English (UK)' (presently listed at 0%). What's up with that?

So Google gets $200,000,000 in net income and can't hire their own translators?

Man, I wish people would volunteer to make my enterprises worth more money. Also, how is it that some languages are more than 100% translated?

The Tagalog translation is a unwieldy piece of shit, the translation is so pained and awkward I get the feeling it was probably done by someone who learned Tagalog from a book or class, i.e. not someone who actually comfortable speaking the language. Never mind that it's useless except as a novelty since any Filipino who can go online already speaks English -- and if I'm going to go the novelty route, give me the Swedish Chef any day. Bork bork bork!

I've thought about fixing the translation, but you know what? It's too much work to do for free, especially for a company that's got the money to have it done professionally. Google, ya gets what ya pays for.

"someone who is actually comfortable", I meant to say.

Damn you Jason Kottke and your blog's lack of a preview button!

Google's translated-by-volunteers system predates their profitability. It seems petty now, but it used to make a lot of sense. It still does, for small-market languages, where a single motivated fluent speaker could make a localized interface the company didn't care enough to make itself.

Two questions:
1) What the hell kind of language is 'Elmer Fudd'?
2) How can something be more than 100% complete?
(read the list of languages if you are wondering what I'm talking about).

The FAQ says that a previously "100% complete" language can become less complete if new messages are added to the Google interface. So I guess this is an example of the reverse.

if it predates their profitability then they should change it. durr.

This seems like a perfect opportunity to play a karma prank on Google in lieau of all the AdSense bs.