Report plagiarism (copy/paste) here. Mods: please give temp or permban as needed

[The Sceptical Chymist]

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.

[1713988287]

1713988287

[1713988287]

1713988287

[1713988287]

1713988287

[1713988287]

1713988287

[suchmoon]

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

[Blacknavy]

~

Everybody can make a mistake, right? He should get what he deserves. #JusticeForAll

[NotATether]

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.

[eddie13]

chirp chirp

[suchmoon]

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.

[JaredKaragen]

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.

[mu_enrico]

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.

[Lauda]

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.

[Teleman]

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

[Lauda]

You should create plagiarism bingo card and put all you reason there

I would but I have yet to state an actual reason for this, or figure out what the reason was. Read my post again. These events are too far into the past for me to know much more than the outside viewer.

[Bthd]

It's a clear plagiarism. You did many plagiarism without quoting and this is a:

intellectual theft

You had kicked out many peoples easily with using rules like weapons. You had tagged peoples easily which you dislike. Users losts their accounts for only small mistakes. And from now same weapons shots you with a true story.

When i saw quoting mistakes, i'm sending pm's to writers "hi you should add sources link or quote it etc." (many of them did it.) Cause the main target should be protecting forum from plagiarism, not a way for kicking peoples. I'm trying to help them, not kicking them out easily. (if they are not cheating or not a real plagiarist) Easily tagging-kicking out others will not helpful for community in my opinion.

May be you can understand these sentences and have some emphaty from now. I'm not going to be happy when see you banned but it's time for rules.

[Teleman]

You should create plagiarism bingo card and put all you reason there

I would but I have yet to state an actual reason for this, or figure out what the reason was. Read my post again. These events are too far into the past for me to know much more than the outside viewer.

Fuck your reason, it's a plagiarism and you should be ban. Simple as that.

It's simple as all plagiarism cases. You plagiarize you should be perma ban.

[Kalemder]

I must have unknowingly repeated and paraphrased text that I had previously read and remembered.

Excuse:  “I just don't remember when I did this shit!”

This does not change that fact that this is not how attribute the work properly (which would have been trivially easy but you decided not to do it). This is intellectual theft nevertheless.

You stole work. Unlike you, I do not respect double standards so no.

What happened to "objective standards"?

does not get to make its own rules. No source, not even a quotation. Time to stop defending intellectual theft and for you to go back to your other activities.

Dishonest thief.

These sentences are quote. Please click on links. This words belong him and his gang. Racist anger, trust abuse, blacklist, lies, collective punishment, manipulation and plagiarism. Endless ban was given for much less, to other members. So really What happened to "objective standards"? What is the crime of those who have been banned to date due to plagiarism?

I can't hear apology here anyway. Just "I must have unknowingly repeated" How can an article be kept in mind so clearly? Even the punctuation marks are the same.

[amishmanish]

I have had appreciation for Lauda for their handling of alt-account spammers, scammers and plagiarizers for a long time. In the sea of the scammer posts, it would have been hard to give everyone a hearing one by one. Those newbie scammers came here AFTER a lot of newbie guides were in place unlike say, 6 years back. Most accounts that were banned by Lauda after they became a moderator may not have gotten personal attention but the guidelines were there, many of them made by Lauda.

Yet, this can't be an excuse. Those posts are 5-6 years in the past and from a time when you would have been told by someone like BadBear of how things are. But then that same standard should have been applied to other people too. This is a fire-trial of the golden rule "Treat others how you want to be treated". There isn't going to be any happy ending here. Its either every banned user who did such a "mistake" before a certain time-frame (Say when guides were made available or ban guides were prominently visible or when the bot was deployed) be allowed to come back or to give the same treatment to Lauda.

This does not change the fact that Lauda does a lot of work in tagging scammer accounts and has contributed a lot to the forum. There's possibility for the witch to be burnt at the stake finally and you can already hear the Hyenas howl. Maybe now is the right time to open parole procedure for Satoshi's forum.

  

[Lauda]

There's possibility for the witch to be burnt at the stake finally and you can already hear the Hyenas howl. Maybe now is the right time to open parole procedure for Satoshi's forum.

They got what they wanted, sadly a lot of senior members are also playing into their games unknowingly. There are truths of which they are not aware of luckily. It would be a waste of time to discuss with them, trying something obviously malicious such as to equate forgetting events of 1 or 2 years ago and 5 to 6 years ago for example and more. Here's to another year of being the main topic of discussion. What year in a row is this? I am sorry for those who collaterally suffer because of my past.

Because the definition of plagiarism is copying and pasting stuff (without attribution).

This is not necessarily the case, but it was evident the account did this out of vengeful reasons and not by mistake or due to advanced definitions of plagiarism.

[NotATether]

I'm going to fix some of the highlighting bitcoinchan made that does not show copy and paste. Because the definition of plagiarism is copying and pasting stuff (without attribution).

Posts 1, 3, 4 and 6 are correct as they are. Red is the post which Lauda is accused of having plagiarized, blue is the text that bitcoinchan has incorrectly classified as plagiarism.

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

Quantum computers don’t reside on the desktop of every other teenage hacker wishing to eavesdrop on his classmates’ Facebook sessions for good reason. Creation of a full-scale quantum computer involves many engineering challenges that some specialists consider to be impossible to accomplish.
The main challenge is making sure qubits are entangled, because each quantum system tends to collapse into a classical state, lacking valuable undetermined properties. We can’t avoid mentioning the long-suffering Schrödinger’s cat here, which eventually can’t stay both dead and alive simultaneously – a quantum computer, however, must maintain this miraculous state for a long enough time to perform calculation and measure results. Modern prototypes can keep this state for milliseconds, and in some cases, a couple of seconds. The task becomes more and more complicated when the qubit count rises too. To break cryptosystems, computers must have 500-2000 qubits (depending on the algorithm and key length), but existing quantum computers operate with 14 qubits at maximum.
That is why today’s quantum computers are not usable for breaking your SSL certificate, but the situation may change in 5 years.
Against this background, Canadian company D-Wave brassily claims that it produces 512-qubit quantum computers. Moreover, these devices are available for sale. Many experts say that the D-Wave computer is not “real,” because it utilizes a quantum annealing effect and can’t demonstrate full properties of a quantum computer.

http://web.archive.org/web/20190507194853/https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/quantum-computers-and-the-end-of-security/2852/

Post 5:

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. 

http://web.archive.org/web/20160205222449/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1035211.0

What would happen if we get down on our knees and pray to God in this way: Dear God, almighty, all-powerful, all-loving creator of the universe, we pray to you to cure every case of cancer on this planet tonight. We pray in faith, knowing you will bless us as you describe in Matthew 7:7, Matthew 17:20, Matthew 21:21, Mark 11:24, John 14:12-14, Matthew 18:19 and James 5:15-16. In Jesus' name we pray, Amen.
We 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 anything happen? No. And the fact that nothing happens proves to us that God is imaginary. Here's why: Jesus makes specific promises in the Bible about how prayer is supposed to work. Jesus says in many different places that he and God will answer your prayers. The fact that those promises are untrue tells us that God is imaginary.

http://web.archive.org/web/20181017072746/https://www.elitetrader.com/et/threads/why-wont-god-heal-amputees.70716/page-32

[Kalemder]

I'm going to fix some of the highlighting bitcoinchan made that does not show copy and paste. Because the definition of plagiarism is copying and pasting stuff (without attribution).

Copy and paste a post. Then change it a little bit. Perform originalization. I'm sorry, but this is also idea theft. In fact, this is a worse crime. Honest people refer to the source.

Other posts are already completely copy-paste.

[suchmoon]

I'm going to fix some of the highlighting bitcoinchan made that does not show copy and paste. Because the definition of plagiarism is copying and pasting stuff (without attribution).

Having busted many word spinners I can assure you that plagiarism is not just "copying and pasting stuff". Why do you keep doing this? There is no point arguing that plagiarism didn't occur. It did. Mods will decide the rest. Should you find yourself in a similar situation you would want the same thing, not mob justice.

[muslol67]

Really? With this so many proof, you can still defend Lauda?
Are the people who attack everyone in the forum by cutting allegations now defending Lauda? Do people who put forward everyone's mistakes for nonsense reasons now try to stretch the most important rule of the forum for Lauda?

Guys, you're getting funny!

And, @theymos should do what he needs to do right now! Or to unlock all accounts banned due to plagiarism to date!

Still, I think the name Lauda would suit this list very well;
http://loyce.club/bans/banned.html