NO.malkie wrote: ↑Fri Jul 18, 2025 4:32 amShades/mods - I'm going to flag this comment to bring it to your attention, and ask you to validate the following suggestion, or modify it, or tell me that it's completely wrong. If it's completely off kilter, I apologise for bothering you with it.
Here's my suggestion: Look at the Purdue University OWL - Online Writing Lab - section on Avoiding Plagiarism.
Use A.I. all you want for research, but treat A.I.-generated content as if it were the published words of a human author that you had read in a book. With the lessons on "Avoiding Plagiarism" in mind, in your own words, write your own paraphrase/precis of what you read, properly attributed. The extra piece of information needed here is that you must also include the name of the A.I. you used and the full prompt text.
This new text is yours, and can be used on this board outside of the A.I. megathread.
Although everyone else would be able to work with that, MG 2.0 has proven himself unable. Therefore, Malkie, for the love of God and all of His holy angels, DO NOT LEAD MG 2.0 INTO TEMPTATION.
To wit, From this point forward, DO NOT COME UP WITH WAYS FOR MG 2.0 TO USE A.I. LEGITIMATELY.
Let this be your eternal rule of thumb: As far as MG 2.0 is concerned, A.I. does not exist and never did exist. He has never heard of it in his life, nor will he ever. Not from you, not from anyone.