this post was submitted on 24 Feb 2024
142 points (91.8% liked)

Technology

59374 readers
3040 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
142
The highest funded plagiarist is probably this AI ethicist (andreasplagiarism.wordpress.com)
submitted 8 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
17 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 24 points 8 months ago (3 children)

Okay, so, maybe correct me if I'm wrong or scold me if I didn't read far enough but that first example of plagiarism, why didn't the author just cite the work? They were describing a basic behaviour tree (a decision tree, I think) and had a source, then didn't cite it. Why wouldn't they cite it?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Because it looks bad if your text is peppered with quotes joined by little strips of connecting material. It gives (rightly) the impression that you don't know how to digest information and put things in your own words.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago

Perhaps because his text was almost ad verbatim the same as the source he didn't cite. There are many more egregious segments than that which you can easily find in his vroniplag page.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

They might literally have had some psychological issue, where they were trying to see how far they could push it without being caught.

Or this whole article could be a hit job - maybe the original thesis literally wrapped these sections with text saying "here is an example of a plausible attempt at plagiarism that would not get caught today - please do not quote me out of context here, m'kay?". The devil is in the details, and I for one am not volunteering to put in the amount of effort it would take to properly judge this person.

Although I bet their bosses are, now.