Caroix wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

Caroix wrote:

INSERT-USER_NAME wrote:

Caroix wrote:

Reported to be closed for trying to raid websites with bots

What does raiding websites with bots have to do with anything being discussed here?

This topic seems to suggest “boycotting” websites using bots including Scratch. Bots are not allowed on Scratch and may also cause server strains, it also is suggesting other people to also “boycott” Scratch. Overall, this topic is suggesting negative thoughts but other people may have other thoughts on what is negative and positive, which may differ their conclusions in other ways.

Boycotting means to not use something.
Scratch isn't a bot.
Boycotting doesn't mean to use bots to cause server strain.

Yes, that is true. Boycotting means not engaging or buying/handling a service.

Scratch is a program designed to teach kids coding created by MIT in 2007, a bot on the other hand is a program designed to interact with systems and users on the internet.

Using bots to cause server strains is unethical and illegal behavior that could result in legal consequences including payment through fines, community service or time in prison.

Caroix wrote:

INSERT-USER_NAME wrote:

Caroix wrote:

Reported to be closed for trying to raid websites with bots

What does raiding websites with bots have to do with anything being discussed here?

This topic seems to suggest “boycotting” websites using bots including Scratch. Bots are not allowed on Scratch and may also cause server strains, it also is suggesting other people to also “boycott” Scratch. Overall, this topic is suggesting negative thoughts but other people may have other thoughts on what is negative and positive, which may differ their conclusions in other ways.

boy·cott
verb

1. withdraw from commercial or social relations with (a country, organization, or person) as a punishment or protest.
   “we will boycott all banks which take part in the loans scheme”
   
   
2. refuse to buy or handle (goods) as a punishment or protest.
   “an advert urges consumers to boycott the firm's coffee”
   
   
3. refuse to cooperate with or participate in (a policy or event).
   “most parties indicated that they would boycott the election”
   

applejuiceproduc wrote:

Caroix wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

Caroix wrote:

INSERT-USER_NAME wrote:

Caroix wrote:

Reported to be closed for trying to raid websites with bots

What does raiding websites with bots have to do with anything being discussed here?

This topic seems to suggest “boycotting” websites using bots including Scratch. Bots are not allowed on Scratch and may also cause server strains, it also is suggesting other people to also “boycott” Scratch. Overall, this topic is suggesting negative thoughts but other people may have other thoughts on what is negative and positive, which may differ their conclusions in other ways.

Boycotting means to not use something.
Scratch isn't a bot.
Boycotting doesn't mean to use bots to cause server strain.

Yes, that is true. Boycotting means not engaging or buying/handling a service.

Scratch is a program designed to teach kids coding created by MIT in 2007, a bot on the other hand is a program designed to interact with systems and users on the internet.

Using bots to cause server strains is unethical and illegal behavior that could result in legal consequences including payment through fines, community service or time in prison.

Thank you for that explanation ChatGPT

Caroix wrote:

Using bots to cause server strains is unethical and illegal behavior that could result in legal consequences including payment through fines, community service or time in prison.

Caroix wrote:

INSERT-USER_NAME wrote:

Caroix wrote:

Reported to be closed for trying to raid websites with bots

What does raiding websites with bots have to do with anything being discussed here?

This topic seems to suggest “boycotting” websites using bots including Scratch. Bots are not allowed on Scratch and may also cause server strains, it also is suggesting other people to also “boycott” Scratch. Overall, this topic is suggesting negative thoughts but other people may have other thoughts on what is negative and positive, which may differ their conclusions in other ways.

jellyfishfisher56 wrote:

Caroix wrote:

Using bots to cause server strains is unethical and illegal behavior that could result in legal consequences including payment through fines, community service or time in prison.

No. It is unethical, but no, you aren't going to end up in prison because you wrote a script that put too much pressure on the servers.

lolecksdeehaha wrote:

jellyfishfisher56 wrote:

Caroix wrote:

Using bots to cause server strains is unethical and illegal behavior that could result in legal consequences including payment through fines, community service or time in prison.

No. It is unethical, but no, you aren't going to end up in prison because you wrote a script that put too much pressure on the servers.

Eh, I'll have to interject on that. If you purposefully DDOS a company's servers, that's definitely illegal and you will get in trouble for it.

jellyfishfisher56 wrote:

Caroix wrote:

INSERT-USER_NAME wrote:

Caroix wrote:

Reported to be closed for trying to raid websites with bots

What does raiding websites with bots have to do with anything being discussed here?

This topic seems to suggest “boycotting” websites using bots including Scratch. Bots are not allowed on Scratch and may also cause server strains, it also is suggesting other people to also “boycott” Scratch. Overall, this topic is suggesting negative thoughts but other people may have other thoughts on what is negative and positive, which may differ their conclusions in other ways.

Please, explain how boycotting means bots.

jellyfishfisher56 wrote:

Caroix wrote:

Using bots to cause server strains is unethical and illegal behavior that could result in legal consequences including payment through fines, community service or time in prison.

No. It is unethical, but no, you aren't going to end up in prison because you wrote a script that put too much pressure on the servers.

Caroix wrote:

jellyfishfisher56 wrote:

Caroix wrote:

Using bots to cause server strains is unethical and illegal behavior that could result in legal consequences including payment through fines, community service or time in prison.

No. It is unethical, but no, you aren't going to end up in prison because you wrote a script that put too much pressure on the servers.

I apologize for my wrong answer. Yes, you are correct, using bots to cause server strains is unethical behavior that I, as a large langauge model, highly discourage that behavior and any similar behavior, however, it is not illegal, but that does not disregard it's ethical problems that I urge you to not ignore.

Caroix wrote:

I apologize for my wrong answer. Yes, you are correct, using bots to cause server strains is unethical behavior that I, as a large langauge model, highly discourage that behavior and any similar behavior, however, it is not illegal, but that does not disregard it's ethical problems that I urge you to not ignore.

jellyfishfisher56 wrote:

-snip-

ajskateboarder wrote:

Caroix wrote:

I apologize for my wrong answer. Yes, you are correct, using bots to cause server strains is unethical behavior that I, as a large langauge model, highly discourage that behavior and any similar behavior, however, it is not illegal, but that does not disregard it's ethical problems that I urge you to not ignore.

Let us have whatever opinions we want on the subject of using bots and stop using ChatGPT already

__evelyn wrote:

ajskateboarder wrote:

Caroix wrote:

I apologize for my wrong answer. Yes, you are correct, using bots to cause server strains is unethical behavior that I, as a large langauge model, highly discourage that behavior and any similar behavior, however, it is not illegal, but that does not disregard it's ethical problems that I urge you to not ignore.

Let us have whatever opinions we want on the subject of using bots and stop using ChatGPT already

large langauge model

Caroix wrote:

I apologize for my wrong answer. Yes, you are correct, using bots to cause server strains is unethical behavior that I, as a large langauge model, highly discourage that behavior and any similar behavior, however, it is not illegal, but that does not disregard it's ethical problems that I urge you to not ignore.

me wrote:

Why is “Yes, that is true. Boycotting means not engaging or buying/handling a service.
Scratch is a program designed to teach kids coding created by MIT in 2007, a bot on the other hand is a program designed to interact with systems and users on the internet.
Using bots to cause server strains is unethical and illegal behavior that could result in legal consequences including payment through fines, community service or time in prison.” a bad question

ChatGPT wrote:

That is a bad question because it lacks research and is incorrect. I cannot inform; I am a language model; please inform them that their post is severely under average correction.

applejuiceproduc wrote:

__evelyn wrote:

ajskateboarder wrote:

Caroix wrote:

I apologize for my wrong answer. Yes, you are correct, using bots to cause server strains is unethical behavior that I, as a large langauge model, highly discourage that behavior and any similar behavior, however, it is not illegal, but that does not disregard it's ethical problems that I urge you to not ignore.

Let us have whatever opinions we want on the subject of using bots and stop using ChatGPT already

large langauge model

Btw who think Cariox is A-Hadi?

I kinda do but I'm not sure.

jellyfishfisher56 wrote:

Caroix wrote:

jellyfishfisher56 wrote:

Caroix wrote:

Using bots to cause server strains is unethical and illegal behavior that could result in legal consequences including payment through fines, community service or time in prison.

No. It is unethical, but no, you aren't going to end up in prison because you wrote a script that put too much pressure on the servers.

I apologize for my wrong answer. Yes, you are correct, using bots to cause server strains is unethical behavior that I, as a large langauge model, highly discourage that behavior and any similar behavior, however, it is not illegal, but that does not disregard it's ethical problems that I urge you to not ignore.

Stop using ChatGPT to answer what we say.

ajskateboarder wrote:

Caroix wrote:

I apologize for my wrong answer. Yes, you are correct, using bots to cause server strains is unethical behavior that I, as a large langauge model, highly discourage that behavior and any similar behavior, however, it is not illegal, but that does not disregard it's ethical problems that I urge you to not ignore.

Let us have whatever opinions we want on the subject of using bots and stop using ChatGPT already

applejuiceproduc wrote:

__evelyn wrote:

ajskateboarder wrote:

Caroix wrote:

I apologize for my wrong answer. Yes, you are correct, using bots to cause server strains is unethical behavior that I, as a large langauge model, highly discourage that behavior and any similar behavior, however, it is not illegal, but that does not disregard it's ethical problems that I urge you to not ignore.

Let us have whatever opinions we want on the subject of using bots and stop using ChatGPT already

large langauge model

Btw who think Cariox is A-Hadi?

I kinda do but I'm not sure.

INSERT-USER_NAME wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

__evelyn wrote:

ajskateboarder wrote:

Caroix wrote:

I apologize for my wrong answer. Yes, you are correct, using bots to cause server strains is unethical behavior that I, as a large langauge model, highly discourage that behavior and any similar behavior, however, it is not illegal, but that does not disregard it's ethical problems that I urge you to not ignore.

Let us have whatever opinions we want on the subject of using bots and stop using ChatGPT already

large langauge model

Btw who think Cariox is A-Hadi?

I kinda do but I'm not sure.

I just looked at their projects and yeah, they do seem like A-Hadi. I'm not entirely sure though, since Caroix knows how to change their pfp.

Caroix wrote:

Wow, I never knew I was so good at sounding like ChatGPT

Ok, sorry, I'll not do it now. Also I am not A-Hadi, changing PFPs is the most simple thing on Scratch probably.

I just like ARGs doesn't mean we are the same person, their are a million people who like ARGs, thousands of people who are in the ATs, and hundreds of people who have the same timezone or similar activity levels…