The forum rules are very clear on that. Making posts using google translate or anything similar is forbidden.
Mind to qoute the rule that states so?
You had better add the previous sentence to the quote to understand the context:
You can’t use a translator and post in other local boards where you don’t know their language as well.
So the rule he is referring to is rule number 27.
27. Using automated translation tools to post translated content in Local boards is not allowed.
That said, mindrust is wrong:
If everybody was using a translator to make posts, all the posts would look the same.
For many years, non-native English speakers have been using these tools in the forum, which has allowed for a better written English. And no, as everyone can see not all posts look the same because online translators have improved so much that they are able to translate the nuances and style of native languages into English.
For people who are not fluent in English, they should find a good tool to translate their thoughts so that others can understand them easily.
I thought making posts with translators is frowned on here or has that been taken out now?
But copying a post into an AI and asking it to generate a reply is essentially plagiarism, which is prohibited here.
Oh! So that's how it's done? I must be real old school not to have figured it out since. Each time I read about using Ai on the forum, it left me with greater perplexity than it did the previous time trying to understand it. Anyway, based on that, you're right that it's dishonesty. Those who do it aren't different from plagiarists.
We have local board and English board, anyone who doesn't know how use English language to compose a text, I think such user should concentrate on local board, besides local boards are now relevant in the community, because using translator to make a post, the person is also cheating the system, because it will be difficult for a user to understand exactly the point of someone who is using a translator to make a post, secondly we need to know that not all translation that's 100% accurate, they most be a jumping of sentence and meaning, so I will say that this forum is meant for an average person who can read in English and understand and also reply with English language, the point we figured out now, is what makes some people to use AI to make a post
For people who are not fluent in English, they should find a good tool to translate their thoughts so that others can understand them easily.
I thought making posts with translators is frowned on here or has that been taken out now?
Skarais must have used the wrong words. People who are not fluent in English should rather find tools like grammarly or any text AI model to correct their grammar to make it readable and understandable. What this does is to correct spellings, punctuations and grammatical concord and not to insert any new ideas.
But copying a post into an AI and asking it to generate a reply is essentially plagiarism, which is prohibited here.
Oh! So that's how it's done? I must be real old school not to have figured it out since. Each time I read about using Ai on the forum, it left me with greater perplexity than it did the previous time trying to understand it. Anyway, based on that, you're right that it's dishonesty. Those who do it aren't different from plagiarists.
The time taken to copy a post, paste in an AI model, wait for generated reply, copy and return to the forum to paste is enough to read and reply organically. People doing it are just lazy and unwilling to learn.
For people who are not fluent in English, they should find a good tool to translate their thoughts so that others can understand them easily.
I thought using translators is frowned on here or has that been taken out now?
But copying a post into an AI and asking it to generate a reply is essentially plagiarism, which is prohibited here.
Oh! So that's how it's done? I must be real old school not to have figured it out since. Each time I read about using Ai on the forum, it left me with greater perplexity than it did the previous time trying to understand it. Anyway, based on that, you're right that it's dishonesty. Those who do it aren't different from plagiarists.
Then you'll have to mine your own blocks. Just as miners can't modify the block subsidy to give themselves double the reward, you also can't just rewrite the rules to take half the fees from them.
I think you overestimate the miners' power in the game. If the Bitcoin users and holders think that the version of Bitcoin is superior to the version without that burning, then there will be enough miners happy to mine the new protocol. And if they don't want to support a softfork you can threaten with a hard fork. The Bitcoin users have always the last word, as seen in 2017
Anyway I don't understand why you think the miners wouldn't like the idea. It's them who will benefit in the end. If the transition to the new protocol is designed well, there will only be a short period where miners won't get coins from the "burnt coins pool". So the proportion of burnt coins could start on a minimal percentage of the fees and then increase over time. Also the delay before the coins are reinserted into circulation by another miner could start with a few blocks, and this delay could become longer each difficulty period until a stable state is reached after a year or so. Once this transitional period has ended, the income for miners will be typically higher than before and they have a predictable minimum income.
When large corporations have a significant stake in BTC, they'll want to support the network's security. Even the average user would likely be willing to contribute something to protect the value of their holdings if block rewards become too small to sustain the ecosystem. This kind of subsidy could be proportional to each person's holdings -- like paying a few dollars a year to keep your $10,000 safe. I don't think most people would object.
I think that's the same idea like @odolvlobo already mentioned about a demurrage. The problem with that may be the competition of altcoins which don't follow that path. Monero for example has already switched to a tail emission, so they don't need this "tax" ...
In a meantime, why don't you create a trust flag against their forum profile? They are clearly a risk service and could easily fish for more victims.
FixedFloat already has three negative feedback posted by icopress, mikeywith, and myself from previous wrongdoings. To persuade DT members to support OP's flag, there needs to be evidence that clearly shows that the service scammed OP or had the intention to do so. OP hasn't posted a single piece of evidence. That doesn't mean that what he is saying isn't true. Anyone could still support the flag, but they would be doing so based exclusively on what OP is saying and not based on what the evidence shows.