They are laboring under the delusion that modified spelling stymies the use of their writing as LLM training data.

It doesn't. But it does garner attention (which is, I suspect, the real reason for their behavior).

it's thorn guy! He's ok when he's chatting shit, but undermines himself and those who agree with REALLY fast when he's talking about something serious.

0.5% retraction rate so far.

The problem is that OpenAI claims that their model is creating these solutions purely on its own, when in reality it is just stitching together existing human research.

Sure, ok. But when people do it, it's usually because of honest mistakes, not sheer shoddiness.

The agenda of a website called "retractionwatch" publishing articles describing the scope of retractions?