hellooooooooooooooo's blog

Div. 2 First Place Cheated
By hellooooooooooooooo, history, 3 years ago, In English

Teating_ clearly cheated in today's contest, and he even got 1st place. just look at his submission for problem D 159352650. im surprised how none of you discovered this... please ban him.

  • Vote: I like it
  • +82
  • Vote: I do not like it

Comments Comments (38)
| Write comment?
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +27 Vote: I do not like it

MikeMirzayanov please look into this.

→ Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +60 Vote: I do not like it

wow he coded all of this in 3 minutes ? amazing

→ Reply
  • »
    »
    3 years ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +68 Vote: I do not like it

    Of course, this is the assembly code generated from cpp source code...

    → Reply
    • »
      »
      »
      3 years ago, # ^ |
      ← Rev. 2   Vote: I like it -23 Vote: I do not like it

      Assembly code executes faster,maybe that's why he submitted that

      → Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +67 Vote: I do not like it

Yeah, his handle also sounds like cheating

→ Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +3 Vote: I do not like it

Even the 5th position

→ Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +3 Vote: I do not like it

Another submission 158419071, and idk how this code working

→ Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
← Rev. 2   Vote: I like it +20 Vote: I do not like it

Is he hacking codeforces? If not, why is he cheating

→ Reply
  • »
    »
    3 years ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +6 Vote: I do not like it

    because he hasn't written that code.

    → Reply
  • »
    »
    3 years ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +18 Vote: I do not like it

    If it was not written by hand, then it was "using special tools to obfuscate the code" which is against the guidelines of competitions.

    → Reply
    • »
      »
      »
      3 years ago, # ^ |
        Vote: I like it +18 Vote: I do not like it

      I don't think it is that obvious. At least it is a grey area.

      Despite what has been said before, there is no rule against using generated code in general. If I write code in TypeScript and transpile it into JavaScript so that I can actually submit it, no one would have a problem with that.

      So the only question is that of obfuscation.

      It is forbidden to obfuscate the solution code as well as create obstacles for its reading and understanding. That is, it is forbidden to use any special techniques aimed at making the code difficult to read and understand the principle of its work.

      Is code "obfuscated" merely because it is written in assembly? It is after all a legitimate programming language. If you find assembly code hard to read, is that really the author's fault? I could argue that in fact, it is your fault for not being sufficiently experienced in assembly programming. The obfuscation clause can't be taken to mean any code that is simply hard to read: otherwise we could ban like half of this site.

      Furthermore the rule is phrased as "aimed at". That seems to imply intent. Can you show that this was written in assembly specifically to make it hard to understand? If I want to participate in a contest with a language that is not supported by Codeforces, compiling it to assembly and then submitting actually sounds like the best choice. It is not like the case of writing every line of code as a #define and shuffling them around where obfuscation is indeed the only reasonable cause to do it.

      → Reply
      • »
        »
        »
        »
        3 years ago, # ^ |
          Vote: I like it -34 Vote: I do not like it

        I dislike how just because someone is a red coder, they get so many upvotes even if what they are saying is wrong.

        There is literally no reason for him to submit assembly code. I believe that he is creating this alt account to test his solutions before submitting them on his main account so he doesn't get any penalty time. You are trying your best to defend a cheater, but it is very annoying when Div 1. people create alt accounts for the purpose of cheating or arrogance.

        → Reply
        • »
          »
          »
          »
          »
          3 years ago, # ^ |
            Vote: I like it +9 Vote: I do not like it

          But I am not defending them. I am only bringing up some reasons as to why things are not so simple.

          I don't know if this is a hard concept to grasp but it is much more valuable to talk about all kinds of possible arguments than to just write comments that are essentially "I agree!!!" and "I don't agree!!!". For some reason people instinctively lump every comment into one of the categories above.

          but it is very annoying when

          Maybe stop idolizing Sparky_Master if you want to seriously discuss annoyance.

          → Reply
      • »
        »
        »
        »
        3 years ago, # ^ |
          Vote: I like it +36 Vote: I do not like it

        I don't think it is that obvious. At least it is a grey area.

        I agree. No one is calling for insta-banning. But it seems to be closer to be against the rules.

        Is code "obfuscated" merely because it is written in assembly?

        No. But was it written in assembly, or was it written in C++ and the assembly was generated, and the person could have simply submitted it in C++? I do not know. It does not mean it should not be looked into.

        It is after all a legitimate programming language.

        In the real world, yes. But in Codeforces, it is not an accepted language. Using C++ to write in-line assembly seems to be only circumventing maybe a conscious decision made by Codeforces. If there is someone actually able to solve the problems in assembly that fast, I would be impressed and would love to see it in action. But how likely is that?

        If you find assembly code hard to read, is that really the author's fault?

        If the code was originally in C, then a tool was used to generate the assembly, then the assembly was submitted, then it is objectively only harder to read. Regardless of one's ability to read assembly. I am not saying my assumptions are necessarily true, though.

        The obfuscation clause can't be taken to mean any code that is simply hard to read: otherwise we could ban like half of this site.

        I do not think anyone said it should be looked into for potential rule-breaking only because it was written in assembly.

        If I want to participate in a contest with a language that is not supported by Codeforces, compiling it to assembly and then submitting actually sounds like the best choice.

        Sure, but how likely is that given the number of allowed languages and the fact that not all languages compile to assembly? The person should get a chance to defend themselves, that is besides the point.

        TL;DR Occam's razor

        → Reply
      • »
        »
        »
        »
        3 years ago, # ^ |
          Vote: I like it +15 Vote: I do not like it

        If I want to participate in a contest with a language that is not supported by Codeforces, compiling it to assembly and then submitting actually sounds like the best choice.

        In that case one should at least add a big comment with the original source that was fed to the generator.

        Just posting assembly severely hampers the ability to hack a solution or just to understand a solution for learning.

        → Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +4 Vote: I do not like it

This might inspire some... (let's not mention how)

→ Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +33 Vote: I do not like it

Do you have any proof? If I am not mistaken, Submitting generated code isn't a violation

→ Reply
  • »
    »
    3 years ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +37 Vote: I do not like it

    This code falls into "obfuscation" category as for me

    → Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +8 Vote: I do not like it

PLEAS LOOK INTO THIS 11!!!!11!!!!11!!!! MikeMirzayanov

→ Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +13 Vote: I do not like it

The funny thing is that he submitted the actual code for every other problem. Imagine solving problem F but cheating on problem D...

→ Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +39 Vote: I do not like it

sir u r right, but plz supot Botswana thx

→ Reply
  • »
    »
    3 years ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

    so why many Dianas got high rank in recent competitions, just like yesterday's PFOI R1?

    → Reply
    • »
      »
      »
      3 years ago, # ^ |
        Vote: I like it +1 Vote: I do not like it

      I wonder too. And it's even strange for them to get the 1st AC for each task which makes me shocked.

      → Reply
  • »
    »
    3 years ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +1 Vote: I do not like it

    so you admit cheating?

    → Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

He also cheated in the only other contest he participated in. You can check his submissions in it

→ Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +4 Vote: I do not like it

Just a speculation, could be wrong

Teating = Testing + Cheating

→ Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +58 Vote: I do not like it

I was also suspicious of the account's submissions on the only other contest they participated in.

There are a large number of suspicious things going on:

  • Submitting C, D, F before A, B

  • Submitting compiled assembly code for C, F, A, B

  • Submission 158419071 for C has filename a.cpp (second line of source code) — note that div2C is div1A

  • Submission 158464234 for F has filename d1.cpp — weird, seeing as D1 isn't even a problem in the div2, but div2F is the same as div1D1

So, I think there is reason to believe that the account is an alt of someone in div1, to test their solutions on the problems without incurring any penalty for wrong answers. Although I would love to be proven wrong, I think the evidence is strong.

→ Reply
  • »
    »
    3 years ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +9 Vote: I do not like it

    i just used cf-tool and parsed wrong contest. it takes me several minutes to download the statement.

    → Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
← Rev. 2   Vote: I like it -33 Vote: I do not like it

He made the checker think he was correct. This is something called an AC automation

have a good look at this

→ Reply
  • »
    »
    3 years ago, # ^ |
      Vote: I like it +10 Vote: I do not like it

    i think u should use google to search what is "assembly code".

    → Reply
    • »
      »
      »
      3 years ago, # ^ |
        Vote: I like it -33 Vote: I do not like it

      I agree. However, I think you shouldn’t teach others when you have already cheated.

      → Reply
      • »
        »
        »
        »
        3 years ago, # ^ |
        ← Rev. 2   Vote: I like it +10 Vote: I do not like it

        u have any proof that i cheated? which rule did i violate?

        → Reply
      • »
        »
        »
        »
        3 years ago, # ^ |
          Vote: I like it 0 Vote: I do not like it

        can u fucking guy just learn how to say some words that don't make any other one confused? c ur low contribution and notice what have u said in recent blogs

        → Reply
      • »
        »
        »
        »
        3 years ago, # ^ |
        ← Rev. 3   Vote: I like it +3 Vote: I do not like it

        u r a chinese but not everyone here is and the same, not all of them are active on luogu! i just wonder what does "typical, very typical" mean ? “典中典”? what does "codeforces is invading atcoder" mean? don't u know that atcoder announcements are usually posted in codeforces? and even u said a "smaller account"? can u just stop using chinglish? ur evidence of cheating doesn't hold water!!! y WinGV64 stands for cheating? can u explain?

        Haha

        Luogu user? Are you?

        that means u r discriminating codeforces users from luogu users, or r u arrogant to be a chinese oier???

        Maybe ‘cu ball’ is a better expression to use?

        UPD : cu -> 铜(copper) -> 同(same), ball -> 球 -> 求(request)

        do u think everyone knows chinese?

        a lot of xxs in luogu also have a codeforces account.

        UPD : xxs means students in primary school / elementary school, and in chinese websites it's a word to express someone is in immaturity of mind

        exactly u.

        → Reply
»
3 years ago, # |
  Vote: I like it +4 Vote: I do not like it

It's definitely a smurf account. I don't believe cheating would lead him to 1st place.

→ Reply