Not that I have a cat in this fight, but at least a few of those examples don't seem to fit the bill for paraphrasing. Its a little iffy but somewhat reasonable if an uncommon phrase sticks in your head, but it'd appear to me that the likelihood of of it being a simple memorable phrase decrease when your sentence structure is the same and there are sort of uncommon bits of stylization
can a Quantum search for SHA128 faster than a classical computer search through SHA256?
where you'd expect it to say
can a Quantum search for SHA128 faster than a classical computer can search through SHA256?
or
can a Quantum search for SHA128 faster than a classical computer searches through SHA256?
That’s a good point—or it would be, if Lauda were a fully fluent English speaker. I have seen her make similar grammatical mistakes herself. The brain does tend to autocorrect such infelicities, even when one
intentionally tries to repeat a phrase by rote; but would that happen, with a person who may make the same mistake?
example 4 is full of the signs of plagiarism that sort of sticks out in people's coursework. Stuff like putting the ö in Schrödinger’s is fairly uncommon unless you are copy and pasting, as not many people know how to type a ö.
Spelling police here. “Schrodinger” would be a
misspelling. “Schrödinger” is correct; and “Schroedinger” is correct, albeit not preferred. To drop the umlaut is unacceptable.
I generally judge people’s intelligence based on such details as whether or not they properly expand the umlaut when restricted to ASCII;
* and if this were coursework, I would take points off for a sloppy misspelling of the name of a famous physicist. “Schrodinger” looks almost as bad as “Hiesenburg”. Anyway, I do not think that orthographic
correctness can ever be taken as evidence of copying and pasting.
(* I do make allowances for people from completely non-European cultures; but any literate European should know the umlaut rule, not only German speakers. N.b. that the umlaut is not the same as the diaeresis, which is used in such English words as “coöperate”; the latter is no longer popular in English, but is still prescribed by the style guides of some intellectual publications. A motto for proper reëducation: You are not a chicken, so don’t turn coöperation into a coop!)
Phew. I am so very glad that none of the trolls have noticed my concerted effort
to finally correct finally to correct my bad old habit of splitting infinitives. It is the only significant linguistic difference between my 2017–2018 posts and my 2020 posts. I am ashamed of the split infinitives, the products of poor childhood education. I
should go through all of my old posts and correct them someday.
4. You people showing any empathy for lauda are going to be tagged by nullius for empathy
I think that’s my cue to desist from posting in a troll’s thread.
I'm all for empathy, fuck nullius who HATES plagiarism in any form. Where is that filthy old pervert anyway? Surely not avoiding this is he?
I have been busy, as evidenced by my recent complete absence from the forum.
Cryptohunter
There was never a more net positive member since satoshi himself.
LOL. “bonesjonesreturns” in sum.