I noticed that one of these posts was deleted while the rest weren't. It appears they are using one of the AI-refinement tools as opposed to just leaving it up to AI to generate the entire post. While its still a bad habit, its not as bad as flat-out AI-generating every post. Looking at this user's most recent posts, its apparent something is definitely up:
Sapling: 99.9% Fake
Copyleaks: 0% AI Generated
GPTZero: 32% AI Generated
Zerogpt: 67.98% AI GPT
Undetectable: 99% likely AI
These results suggest they are using AI for refinement instead of rote generation. The problem is the bar for what passes as "not spam" is so low in these sections, the posts are unlikely to be deleted even if the use of AI is clearly present.
I agree, I also checked a few of these posts and I was receiving mixed results from AI scanners, which is why I couldn't come up with an accurate result. Your claim is what makes the most sense in this scenario, I haven't used Grammarly, but Quilbot has advanced quite a lot and has integrated several AI tools in their grammar check tool. Some of them include to improve your text, to completely re-write it or even continue writing by itself. Whatever it is, it's one thing to correct a few grammar mistakes and another thing to have it completely modify your text.Sapling: 99.9% Fake
Copyleaks: 0% AI Generated
GPTZero: 32% AI Generated
Zerogpt: 67.98% AI GPT
Undetectable: 99% likely AI
These results suggest they are using AI for refinement instead of rote generation. The problem is the bar for what passes as "not spam" is so low in these sections, the posts are unlikely to be deleted even if the use of AI is clearly present.
My attention was also drawn to the user's Outhue posts. A lot of detectors show that his posts were created using AI. However, I can't say that all give the same result. Check several of his posts. Is it worth sending reports to moderators when the results are quite controversial? Maybe we should ask these users here and find out the history of how their posts began to show the use of AI. Especially since many, after the accusation, shout that they are as clean as a drop of dew.
The profitability of Bitcoin mining plays a crucial role in preventing attacks. If mining Bitcoin is no longer profitable, it becomes easier for attacks to occur.
There’s little incentive to mine Bitcoin if it’s not profitable. Even if your goal is simply to learn how Bitcoin mining works, it’s reasonable to expect that it will take you at least a week to get a grasp of it, after which you should discontinue your efforts.
In the past, I was concerned about potential attacks, but those days are over. The hash rates are now distributed across various countries and locations, including China, the U.S., Nigeria, and others. It's too late to worry about that now.
Plugging in an outdated ASIC miner won't help Bitcoin if mining isn't profitable. If it’s not generating profit, it doesn’t contribute positively to the network.
There’s little incentive to mine Bitcoin if it’s not profitable. Even if your goal is simply to learn how Bitcoin mining works, it’s reasonable to expect that it will take you at least a week to get a grasp of it, after which you should discontinue your efforts.
In the past, I was concerned about potential attacks, but those days are over. The hash rates are now distributed across various countries and locations, including China, the U.S., Nigeria, and others. It's too late to worry about that now.
Plugging in an outdated ASIC miner won't help Bitcoin if mining isn't profitable. If it’s not generating profit, it doesn’t contribute positively to the network.
Sapling: Fake: 100.0%
Copyleaks: AI Generated
GPTZero: 100% AI generated
Zerogpt: 67.98% AI GPT
Undetectable: 99% likely AI
quillbot.com: 0
