Pages:
Author

Topic: Report plagiarism (copy/paste) here. Mods: please give temp or permban as needed - page 87. (Read 119161 times)

newbie
Activity: 4
Merit: 0
I was just stopping by, and something interests me.

I hate to say this but it is plagiarism, and if rules were consistently applied - Lauda should be temp-and-sig-banned.
But she said, she already received the punishment:
You may not be aware of this, but I was banned several times for the infractions made during my earlier time on the forum.

What do you think? Get punished again for the same reason? *assumed she is telling the truth.
It's like getting released from jail and then getting arrested again for the same crime.
I am not sure when all of these posts were made exactly in relation to the bans. It may be that all were made before or that none were. There is no way for me to verify the exact dates sadly, I have tried. Furthermore, even if they were made before the account was banned there is no way to verify that they were seen and partially responsible for the bans. Coincidentally, many users have resurfaced since or around this report (in addition to a flag being created the same day) just not the one who could answer my questions about this. BadBear has been inactive for 2 years.
You should create plagiarism bingo card and put all you reason there
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 3000
Terminated.
I was just stopping by, and something interests me.

I hate to say this but it is plagiarism, and if rules were consistently applied - Lauda should be temp-and-sig-banned.
But she said, she already received the punishment:
You may not be aware of this, but I was banned several times for the infractions made during my earlier time on the forum.

What do you think? Get punished again for the same reason? *assumed she is telling the truth.
It's like getting released from jail and then getting arrested again for the same crime.
I am not sure when all of these posts were made exactly in relation to the bans. It may be that all were made before or that none were. There is no way for me to verify the exact dates sadly, I have tried. Furthermore, even if they were made before the account was banned there is no way to verify that they were seen and partially responsible for the bans. Coincidentally, many users have resurfaced since or around this report (in addition to a flag being created the same day) just not the one who could answer my questions about this. BadBear has been inactive for 2 years.
copper member
Activity: 2324
Merit: 2142
Slots Enthusiast & Expert
I was just stopping by, and something interests me.

I hate to say this but it is plagiarism, and if rules were consistently applied - Lauda should be temp-and-sig-banned.
But she said, she already received the punishment:
You may not be aware of this, but I was banned several times for the infractions made during my earlier time on the forum.

What do you think? Get punished again for the same reason? *assumed she is telling the truth.
It's like getting released from jail and then getting arrested again for the same crime.
legendary
Activity: 1848
Merit: 1166
My AR-15 ID's itself as a toaster. Want breakfast?
These only happens when you're too desperate to get revenge.
Regardless of what the motives were in discovering these posts by Lauda, they still exist and were found--and there have been tons of members who've been banned for plagiarism they've committed years in the past.  My question is: should those members have been allowed to edit their old posts with references and/or explanations in lieu of a ban?  While Lauda claims that what he/she wrote must have been from memory, somehow I don't think Lauda would accept that as a valid reason for many of the plagiarists who've gotten caught--nor would a lot of the rest of us, for that matter.

If Lauda doesn't get a ban, it would certainly appear (to my eyes, at least) he/she's getting a pass on this whereas other members have been banned mercilessly with no chance to retroactively correct omissions of citations.  I'll definitely be watching this one.

Seems like the Cycling Club will take over LoL.
Hey man, I'm all for the Fox Team Cyclers.

Call me an ass licker all you want but I'm just going to remind you of theymos' opinion of situations like this (it's about DT but I think it can also be used for reporting cases):

No, it can't. Plagiarism is one of very few things that theymos has zero tolerance for (except for account buyers).

If we find that you plagiarized, then you absolutely will be permanently banned, even if we find it years after you did it.


Both of these speak every word that needs to be said from me on the subject of Lauda.

I have silently watched things unfold;  and seen both baseless and true accusations from and about this person.

I'm on the feeling of:  the way those edits were made:  were to achieve the objective of providing substance as to make a post;  rather than reference people correctly to the information.... passing it on as themselves.


This is a massive no-no in any respect.

My cards are on the table.   I wonder where the chips will go.
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
Call me an ass licker all you want but I'm just going to remind you of theymos' opinion of situations like this (it's about DT but I think it can also be used for reporting cases):

No, it can't. Plagiarism is one of very few things that theymos has zero tolerance for (except for account buyers).

If we find that you plagiarized, then you absolutely will be permanently banned, even if we find it years after you did it.
legendary
Activity: 2296
Merit: 2262
BTC or BUST
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
constructive way ?
oh yes) ass licking morons ( like you ) see constructive way on it
but for normal peoples this is a moron's shit

Call me an ass licker all you want but I'm just going to remind you of theymos' opinion of situations like this (it's about DT but I think it can also be used for reporting cases):

- You should be willing to forgive past mistakes if the person seems unlikely to do it again.



With that attitude, my guess is that nothing's going to change, save a bunch of extra angry topics when the retaliators don't get what they want.
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1291
~

Everybody can make a mistake, right? He should get what he deserves. #JusticeForAll
legendary
Activity: 3654
Merit: 8909
https://bpip.org
Because she handled this incident in a constructive way? Unlike how some other people react when accused of the same.

Most users banned (perma/temp/sig) for plagiarism didn't have a chance to handle anything. Posts would get reported, most wouldn't even get posted in a public thread like this, and a ban would follow. Which raises some questions as to why this wasn't reported to mods, or if it was - why mods didn't act.

I hate to say this but it is plagiarism and if rules were consistently applied - Lauda should be temp-and-sig-banned.

Unless he bought the account sometime in 2016, in which case it's all cool Smiley
legendary
Activity: 3556
Merit: 7011
Top Crypto Casino
These only happens when you're too desperate to get revenge.
Regardless of what the motives were in discovering these posts by Lauda, they still exist and were found--and there have been tons of members who've been banned for plagiarism they've committed years in the past.  My question is: should those members have been allowed to edit their old posts with references and/or explanations in lieu of a ban?  While Lauda claims that what he/she wrote must have been from memory, somehow I don't think Lauda would accept that as a valid reason for many of the plagiarists who've gotten caught--nor would a lot of the rest of us, for that matter.

If Lauda doesn't get a ban, it would certainly appear (to my eyes, at least) he/she's getting a pass on this whereas other members have been banned mercilessly with no chance to retroactively correct omissions of citations.  I'll definitely be watching this one.

Seems like the Cycling Club will take over LoL.
Hey man, I'm all for the Fox Team Cyclers.
legendary
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1166
🤩Finally Married🤩
Outstanding effort.
These only happens when you're too desperate to get revenge.
So as for the user who have been here and just created an alt to do that, it is indeed a success.
And now, we will be seeing some users who'll likely to celebrate when Lauda get's her punishment.

Just what will happen to the Cult?
Seems like the Cycling Club will take over LoL.
sr. member
Activity: 1050
Merit: 416
Buy Bitcoin
@bitcoinchan You might possibly be an alt but it's really something to go after 26k+ posts and check for plagiarism. Outstanding effort.
But I wouldn't want Lauda to be banned for this reason, she has contributed a lot to the forum apart from these. I think a Signature ban would do.
legendary
Activity: 2016
Merit: 1118
bla...bla...bla..

why lauda is still not banned?

Because she handled this incident in a constructive way? Unlike how some other people react when accused of the same.

Mind sharing why you deleted the first time you have posted this, and then replaced it with exactly the same post? The original post was #54465528, this is #54469714.

Maybe so that his report shows on the last page of the thread.

I was banned for plagiarizing a much smaller number of characters. You can read this story from a year ago.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/legendary-account-banned-5146018
legendary
Activity: 2436
Merit: 1187


Because she handled this incident in a constructive way? Unlike how some other people react when accused of the same.



Maybe so that his report shows on the last page of the thread.

constructive way ?
oh yes) ass licking morons ( like you ) see constructive way on it
but for normal peoples this is a moron's shit
legendary
Activity: 1568
Merit: 6660
bitcoincleanup.com / bitmixlist.org
bla...bla...bla..

why lauda is still not banned?

Because she handled this incident in a constructive way? Unlike how some other people react when accused of the same.

Mind sharing why you deleted the first time you have posted this, and then replaced it with exactly the same post? The original post was #54465528, this is #54469714.

Maybe so that his report shows on the last page of the thread.
legendary
Activity: 2436
Merit: 1187
legendary
Activity: 2674
Merit: 3000
Terminated.
Thank you for reporting these. I must have unknowingly repeated and paraphrased text that I had previously read and remembered. It was not intentional. I am making explicitly marked corrections, with appropriate citation of sources, and links to the earliest available archived versions of my edited posts. I will not remove any posts, or try to hide anything.


Some of the sources provided by bitcoinchan were not correct. On researching my own posts, I found that: Source of text from Post 3 is actually Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fear,_uncertainty,_and_doubt&oldid=621176634
Quote
FUD is generally a strategic attempt to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information.

Source of text from Post 4 is somebody named Darren Wilson (whose work I have not read). This is quoted within the page linked by bitcoinchan:
https://web.archive.org/web/20150423094426/http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/behind-the-lens/48176-atheists-are-right-that-christianity-sounds-absurd-but-i-believe-in-it
Quote
From an outside observer's standpoint, Christianity is kind of absurd.

Think about it. We believe in an invisible man who lived over 2,000 years ago in a series of backwater towns in the Middle East, was killed by some religious zealots, and then was magically raised from the dead three days later, after which he floated up into the sky and disappeared, thus becoming the invisible man we now believe in and pin all our hopes to. Oh, and on top of that, we believe in other invisible beings: angels and demons—who are all around us, helping and influencing us. Meanwhile, another invisible Spirit (the Holy Spirit) is constantly at work behind the scenes around the earth, keeping the whole thing straight and intervening whenever He can.

For Post 5, bitcoinchan cited a post on another forum that apparently plagiarised this:
https://web.archive.org/web/20060421081519/http://godisimaginary.com/i1.htm
Quote
If you would like, gather a million faithful believers together into a prayer circle. Have them all pray together that God cures every case of cancer on the planet tomorrow. Pray sincerely, knowing that when God answers this completely heartfelt, unselfish, non-materialistic prayer, it will glorify God and help millions of people in remarkable ways.

Will it happen? Of course not. Your prayer will go unanswered, in direct defiance to Jesus' promises in the Bible. That is because God is imaginary.
I have not yet been able to verify the original authorship of this quote. It is the earliest example I can find.

Text from Post 6 was published in a book that I have not read: Greta Christina, Why Are You Atheists So Angry?: 99 Things That Piss Off the Godless (Pitchstone Publishing, 2012). Bitcoinchan cited something that appears to be her earlier blog, but I cannot verify this. The same text seems to be copied and pasted all over the Internet, often without attribution. I don't know where I saw it (or some of the other items here).

In no case did I knowingly copy anything.

You may not be aware of this, but I was banned several times for the infractions made during my earlier time on the forum. It was only through extensive private conversations with BadBear during or around my ban, who taught me the right way to behave on the forum, did things started to change. BadBear was one of the strictest mods on the forum (with many complaints from idiots to prove it). I appreciated BadBear's guidance that helped make me a good contributor to the community; and I have continually tried to improve since then.

These posts made in 2014-2015 were all long before theymos made me a moderator. The archives linked by bitcoinchan show me as "Staff", but Archive.org made those snapshots much later. I despise plagiarism, but appreciate your effort in helping me correct those posts.


Mind sharing why you deleted the first time you have posted this, and then replaced it with exactly the same post? The original post was #54465528, this is #54469714.
legendary
Activity: 2016
Merit: 1118
Great job @bitcoinchan!
Today I have finish 1 year when I couldn't have a signature. And Yes, I got banned for just 1 post. I will keep an eye on this event.
newbie
Activity: 1
Merit: 35
Username: Lauda
Profile link: https://bitcointalksearch.org/user/lauda-101872

Evidence

Post 1:

Your English levels are under those of a 5th grader. Consider taking a course, because you complicate things and usually make no sense.
I never said that SHA256 for a normal computer wasn't SHA128 for a quantum one. You didn't explain it because it can't be explained well i.e. what you said effectively makes no sense. A quantum computer can't beat SHA 256 (i.e. SHA 128). Actually if SHA gets broken the problem will be on a much larger scale where Bitcoin will be irrelevant (unless globally adopted). A lot of things use SHA, for example banks.

What I'm trying to say is:
For SHA256, it effectively becomes SHA128 to a Quantum computer. Now the question remains, can a Quantum search for SHA128 faster than a classical computer search through SHA256?
With out current technology and for the near future, we still can't build a real Quantum computer that can even begin to tackle this problem, let alone solve it.

http://web.archive.org/web/20160204084145/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026125.0

Shor's Algorithm applies to prime factorization, which SHA256 doesn't use.
What you're looking for to crack SHA256 is Grover's Algorithm. Basically under classical models of computation the optimal way to find a matching hash is to simply search through the entire space yielding O(n). Under Quantum Computing the optimal time is O(n^0.5), which means effectively you have halved the key-length.
For SHA256, it effectively becomes SHA128 to a Quantum computer. Now the question remains, can a Quantum search for SHA128 faster than a classical computer search through SHA256?
With our current technology and for the foreseeable future, we still cannot build a Quantum computer that can yet begin to tackle this problem, let alone solve it
in a time within our lifespan. Thus SHA256 is considered "secure enough" for now.
http://web.archive.org/web/20190105172604/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=78693.0


Post 2:

I see no information about 128 bit keys being broken. Any information found on stackexchange has no guarantee to be correct. It confirms what I said. SHA can't be reversed; it has to be brute forced.
It clearly indicated that quantum computers are more powerful than the computers of today, which is logical. There is no information on there internet about this. You're talking out of a hat.
Yes 128 bit security is 18446744073709551616 times faster to bruteforce than 256 bit. This doesn't mean that it is vulnerable when used.
It's obvious that people are commenting without proper knowledge in quantum related technology. The computers are not nowhere near ready to do any complicated jobs.
The main challenge in a Qcomputer is to make sure that the qubits are entangled (if you're familiar with Schrödinger’s cat you will know what I'm talking about; look that up). The computer must stay in this state (for the cat - it can't be simultaneously dead or alive) long enough to perform calculations and get results. The ones that we have can keep the state for miliseconds or maybe a couple of seconds. That's not long enough to do something useful. To break encryption these computers must have 500-2000qubits. Existing quantum computers operate with 14 qubits at maximum.
I have not forgotten about D-wave though. The company D-Wave claims that it has produced a 512 qubit Qcomputer. That is not a real quantum computer because it uses quantum annealing effect and can't demonstrate full properties of one. It is basically set to do a few specific tasks and represents no danger to encryption.
To summarize: You're wrong. Existing implementations have not shown that they can beat 128bit encryption. They aren't even close. That's the current situation. I'm not saying that in 5 years we won't have better technology. We might operate with 1400 qubits or be stuck at 140. Nobody really knows.
http://web.archive.org/web/20160204084306/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1026125.40

Exactly how is spreading FUD related to retardation?
Fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) = is generally a strategic attempt to influence perception by disseminating negative and dubious or false information.
At least he is not spreading any FUD about Bitcoin. The altcoins matter no less. How about you take a look at OP? Those 2 threads in Bitcoin Discussion truly amazed me.  Roll Eyes
http://web.archive.org/web/20160225063655/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=729053.140

Well this is actually an advanced view of the matter. This is what I expect from people who aren't from Bit-X and DaDice. You've written this very nicely. It is making them reject reasoning and critical thinking.
Religions such as Christianity are absurd. This is an objective opinion.  Just think about it. How would it be if you had never heard of any religion till you were grown up and actually though for yourself? If we take Christianity for an example; you believe in an invisible man who allegedly lived over 2000 years ago. He was killed by religious zealost and then he magically raised from the dead just after three days. In addition to that, they believe in other invisible being such as angels and demons. Meanwhile, another invisible Spirit (the Holy Spirit) is constantly at work behind the scenes around the earth, keeping the whole thing straight and intervening whenever he can. The words 'whenever he can' have been specifically used because since he exists why should he save the little children from abuse and rape?  Roll Eyes
http://web.archive.org/web/20160202021047/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.40

Is this supposed to be a real discussion or some troll thread? You can't really find scientific proof for something like this to not to exist. If there is no proof that it exists then it should be assumed that it does not.
What one can do is explain how the Bible and whole religion is messed. As an example take praying.
We pray sincerely, knowing that when God answers this prayer, it will glorify God and help millions of people in remarkable ways. What will happen when we pray? Nothing.
I'm not exactly sure from which part this is but I know that it exists "Ask and it will be given to you". If we all ask for cancer to be cured it definitely will.  Roll Eyes
http://web.archive.org/web/20160205222449/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1035211.0

This was not easy to understand for someone who's not native to English. People believe in something because they need to, hence hope exists. This doesn't affect it being true or not.
We used to think something(X) was caused by physical cause and effect, but now we understand that it's caused by God, or spirits, or demons, or the soul.
http://web.archive.org/web/20160205222449/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1035211.0

Now. The number of times that a natural explanation of a phenomenon has been replaced by a supernatural or religious one? The number of times humankind has said,
“We used to think (X) was caused by physical cause and effect, but now we understand that it’s actually caused by God, or spirits, or demons, or the soul”?
https://web.archive.org/web/20190331065516/https://the-orbit.net/greta/2008/09/15/the-ten-main-reasons-i-dont-believe-in-god/
legendary
Activity: 2212
Merit: 7064
I don't think that's the case here. This forum is just scraping BitcoinTalk's posts and posting there under their "administrator" account.

Thanks.
Deleted...there was something strange that is why I asked for confirmation.
Pages:
Jump to: