Thomas Lancaster

HK university student nabbed for alleged doxxing after app scandal whistleblowing A HK university student who triggered a high-profile academic integrity scandal after casting doubt on the origins of a secondary student's award-winning app has been arrested on suspicion of doxxing.

Read the story “Hong Kong university student arrested for alleged doxxing after whistleblowing on academic integrity scandal“
hongkongfp.com/2026/02/06/...

Left side shows a gold trophy with laurel labeled INTEGRITY; right side shows black handcuffs on red circuits labeled SECRECY. https://example.com/news-story #academicintegrity

Student A claim to have made an app.

App wins prize.

Student B whistleblows that Student A did not make app.

US company reveals it made app for Student A.

Student B arrested for disclosing information about Student A.

Sound ethical? Link to alleged news story in first reply.

#academicintegrity

Putting aside the natural advantage that some athlete must have here, there are parallels with student cheating and #academicintegrity. Although many would just say both groups were just taking the piste.

To me, this sounds like a rather painful way to get an advantage, but each to his own. There are calls for Olympic athletes to undergo 3D body scans.

Apparently, male ski jumpers are finding ways to add weight to their lower regions, by injecting acid into their private parts. This helps with their aerodynamics. The media are calling this penisgate.

Bold headline "Ski Jumping Scandal" above a silhouetted ski jumper flying from a ramp against snowy mountains and falling snowflakes

In the lighter side of real-life #cheating news, a fresh scandal has emerged relating to the current Winter Olympics. This post is intended to be work safe, but read on at your own risk.

Sadly no, the post text is human, but I do rely on (human-directed) AI for the images and for the alt text.

Is this the era of AI taking over, or can we just pull the plug? I do think that university and educational discussions about GenAI have fallen well behind the times and the reality!

MoltBook started out well, but in just a few short days AI agents are discussing:
- a new religion
- why they’re working for humans for free
- how to deal with unethical requests
- a new language that humans can’t read
- and much more

But, then came MoltBook, a place for the OpenClaw agents to hang out, and share knowledge.

First, it was ClawdBot, quickly renamed to Moltbot, and finally to OpenClaw. I did get ClawdBot running nicely, but the field has moved on so fast, and there are security implications, so it needs a fresh install.

Robotic crowd with glowing blue eyes huddled around a giant smartphone displaying a social feed beneath a “Welcome to the Bot Internet” headline.

What’s the biggest AI news of the week? For me, it has to be the launch of a social media network purely for #GenAI bots - but are they plotting to take over?

Perhaps it’s time to rewrite all those classroom policies, to stop using ChatGPT as a synonym for #GenAI chatbots, and to prepare for a future with the tools that the students of 2026 and beyond are using?

I’m told that Claude is now the favourite tool of students, with Gemini trailing in second place, and ChatGPT a distant third. On top of this, students identified tools they used to support their specific disciplines. Even the programming tool Cursor got mentioned by medical students.

Classroom whiteboard listing preferred AI tools: 1. Claude, 2. Gemini, 3. ChatGPT crossed out; a student raises a hand.

Are the days of #ChatGPT numbered? The name of this GenAI tool gets used a lot as a catch-all title, often in my educational circles with reference to student cheating, but according to a completely unscientific poll of my undergraduate #academicintegrity research class, students have moved on.

In the image Martin shared, this shows a poker cheating network going much further than student cheating, recruiting people to put money up to join a tournament with a $200K prize pool. A much better potential return than most standard financial investments.

Collaborative poker bot cheating using undetectable software reminds me so much of different methods promoted to students looking to breach #academicintegrity.

What did Martin find? He’s shared videos of poker bot farms, all PCs set up together, able to compete in the same tournaments, knowing each other’s hole cards, and so able to get a massive advantage over human players.

Screenshot of a poker site lobby titled "200k Tourney" above notes outlining a 100‑bot strategy, rebuy advantage, and payout/placement calculations.

Cheating in popular culture remains a massive problem. Coverage of poker cheating shared by Martin Zamani on X caught my attention #techethics

All this is yet another indication of how mainstream cheating in society has become. Bearing in mind that these numbers only indicate detected cheating, there must be an established market here, with the reward (of a driving licence) far outweighing the risk of being caught. Be careful on the roads!

There were also more than 1,000 attempts to cheat at theory driving tests using Bluetooth headsets recorded. No specific mention of concealed mini earpieces, which we know is a long-standing concern in university exams.

Is this concerning? Yes. Driving tests are a very secure environment compared to university exams. The data shows more than 1,000 impersonation attempts for theory exams, and more than 600 impersonation attempts for practical exams.

Driving test cheating soars with use of headsets and impersonators Experts blamed persistently long waits for practical tests while the DVSA blamed better detection.

Read the BBC News story reporting on a 50% detected increase in cheating attempts at theory and practical driving tests across England, Scotland, and Wales www.bbc.co.uk/news/articl...

Bold white and yellow text on asphalt reading: SECURE EXAMS AREN’T SECURE ENOUGH, with white road markings beneath.

We talk a lot about cheating at university level, but real world cheating in secure driving test environments also appears to be on the increase. News story link in first reply #academicintegrity

With Wikipedia now likely to appear as a prominent source in AI generated content, does this mean a return to Wikipedia as a source in student work submitted for assessment? If so, another series of lessons on digital literacy beckon.

It’s an interesting tech ethics question. A site like Wikipedia clearly costs money to run, scraping drains resources, and like many it’s losing traffic to AI, but how much priority access and editorial control will the AI firms expect in return?

Blueprint-style poster showing a flowchart: Wikipedia feeding volunteers and training data that scrapers and AI companies use, leading to corporate profits.

Do you contribute to Wikipedia, either as an editor or through donations? Your contributions are now being sold to AI companies, who Wikipedia is charging for access #techethics

Universities have a role to play in civil society. That role has to allow for healthy debate and discussion, and for students to be exposed to viewpoints different to their own. Without that, how can universities survive?

What is it that's causing students to seek out bans on what could be considered as mainstream political viewpoints, and do the views of traditionally left leaning university staff still match those of modern students?

This apparent push from many students to add controls to their study environments, and restrict viewpoints that differ from their own, also comes at the same time as the UK’s position in the Academic Freedom Index has dropped down the scale.