18:49 Posted: Oct 2009
Views: 4,155,145 | Comments: 760
19:56 Posted: Aug 2009
Views: 771,606 | Comments: 109
18:00 Posted: Jan 2008
Views: 2,343,617 | Comments: 413
21:45 Posted: Jun 2006
Views: 2,785,664 | Comments: 443
21:16 Posted: Sep 2006
Views: 5,108,095 | Comments: 717
TEDCred score: +2.10 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A reply on Talk: Paul Ewald asks, Can we domesticate germs?
I also think that when he said "across the board", he was talking about the mentality of examining the germs from an evolutionary POV. That is, limit their transmission options to those which require a relatively healthy host.
A reply on Talk: Craig Venter unveils "synthetic life"
A comment on Conversation: Would you translate (or spread) a TED talk if you didn't agree with it's topic or the speaker's point of view?
Nevertheless, I agree with the point you made in one of your posts: even if I disagree with a video, translating it would allow for a bigger audience and a bigger audience would mean more people to think about the idea, criticize it and even refine it.
Now, having said the above, I should also mention that so far I haven't watched a single TED video that I felt opposed to. All the reactions I recall having ranged from "meh =/ " to "AWESOME!! o/", never "OUTRAGEOUS!! >("
As for the second part of your question, yes, I believe people would automatically assume I agree with the video. We're all volunteers here, we don't need to translate these videos to make a living, so it seems natural to me that one would assume I chose a particular video because I liked something about it. Of course a volunteer could only be translating in order to hone their skills and choosing videos solely based on how easy or hard the English transcript looks, but I don't think the average viewer would bother thinking that deeply into the matter :p