my favorite part about confirmed math genius awval supporting trump is that it actually would have cost him money. save a few hundred in taxes while giving up a few grand in health care. so smart tho.

Geez, I haven't made a single post about Trump or the USA yet, have I?

You Brits are insanely nationalistic. I have like 10000 posts that are critical of the US and Trump in the last year and you and your pal 57 literally **** your pants if anything is said about your tiny island. Brexit is absolutely no surprise. If BroadwaySushy is a Brit that's absolutely no surprise.

And that was blaming the UK for Trump? You are, as you might say, thick as a brick.

this article is so so good. i had never read the 2012 baffler article cited in there either. it is basically a perfect summation. describes my relatives and family to a T I think. no turning back now unfortunately i think they are long gone

I would hold him accountable in the sense that if I was his editor I'd tell him he should cite the source. But it's not plagiarism as you understand it. It would raise a red flag if he were an undergraduate student, because in all undergraduate writing assignments, they're partly being assessed on writing ability.

Gorsuch's copied text lays out complicated technical facts of a case he will go on to make his own arguments about. No one is assessing his prose writing. To rephrase those facts in his own words would likely open him up to error.

I would say it is better to quote the whole thing and attribute the source. But it's not egregious to skip the attribution, because again, these are facts written in plain, direct prose.

If you go on the arXiv, you will find many math papers with substantial text overlap. From einbert's perspective, this would imply a huge crisis of academic integrity in math. But what it actually is is people copying definitions of complex mathematical quantities, using the exact wording so as to avoid potentially subtle errors.

This. I'm assuming he did not cite his sources, in which case it's just outright stealing someone else's work (imo; ianal). I can't imagine it's some sort of standard operating procedure. In just about any occupation I can think of, it's extremely unethical, if not illegal.

BUT WHAT ABOUT WARREN G. HARDING?

Terrible reading comprehension (as well as personal abuse) in this post.

just got on, no ones talking about bannon?

lol at him saying he completed his mission

And whatever post upstream that showed a bunch of academic sources saying it was plagiarism are just sticking the boot in? If it is so common how many other SCOTUS judges have done it? And what is Gorsuch saying about it? It seems like if you are being careful to copy someone else's definition of a thing you'd want to be even more careful to site it, not less careful, that part of your explanation doesn't ring true.

I agree with you that the only reason we need to not select this guy is Garland and **** Trump, but this sounds like a reason to question his competency.

It's not that hard to simply quote your source fully and give credit. It's taught at the undergraduate level. And it's an issue of integrity as well as writing ability.

Who's Bannon? Oh, right, the temporary part-time volunteer that was around briefly and never met with Trump.

wtf dude. thats like the definition of plagiarism. you dont get to directly quote someone else's words without citing. hell, you arent supposed to even take their ideas and use your own words.

but no, you dont get to use exact phrases, let along full paragraphs, just bc it is easier. like, lol.

This actually seems to be a failure of Democrats to realize that trying to support a group doesn't guarantee that the group will support you.

In an Ideal Democrat World, everybody who's not a straight white US born male would be a Democrat and they'll soon win every election ever based solely on that. But that's not how it works.

cherry on the top is that he WORKS in healthcare administration and still didn't connect the dots

Worked for the last 40...

No they have no obligation to support the party. The problem is that the culture is perfectly willing to let people paint themselves as progressive or an ally even if they support the Republican party. We don't help LGBT people to hustle for their votes, we do it because it's the right thing to do.

Man leaves Breitbart and joins known Russian propaganda network due to concerns about journalistic integrity at Breitbart. #notheonion

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics...putnik/522051/

NYT: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...ties.html?_r=0



also #notheonion

This.

The definition of a Freudian slip.

Some thought it was plagiarism. Some thought it was sloppy (which is where I'm at). The author of the original text didn't think much of it at all.

I can only speak to text overlap being common in math. There are legal guys here, I hope they will weigh in. But "someone else's definition" is a somewhat wrong way of looking at it in math. They will get cited if they're sufficiently new (under 15 years old) and novel, but standard definitions won't. Many times a definition is just a bunch of existing concepts being isolated in an obvious way. If you define MC(G) to be the (class of a) maximally compact subgroup of G, then you really can't call that definition "your work." The concepts in it already exist and have been studied, and the name is obvious.

Yeah obviously that is what has been holding Israel back all these years.

You'd think Barack Obama being a pawn of George Soros would've helped him out there or something

Easy answer now is "o'reilly is horrible too"

hah wp