Slop.

593 readers

478 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/El Chisme

founded 9 months ago

MODERATORS

Lyudmila@hexbear.net

VILenin@hexbear.net

ButtBidet@hexbear.net

MiraculousMM@hexbear.net

gaystyleJoker@hexbear.net

sweet_pecan@hexbear.net

105

Exploring Left-Wing Extremism on the Decentralized Web: An Analysis of Lemmygrad.ml (arxiv.org)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by LemmySlopSkimmer@hexbear.net to c/slop@hexbear.net

148 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This study investigates the presence of left-wing extremism on the Lemmygrad.ml instance of the decentralized social media platform Lemmy, from its launch in 2019 up to a month after the bans of the subreddits r/GenZedong and r/GenZhou.

We conduct a temporal analysis on Lemmygrad.ml’s user activity, with also measuring the degree of highly abusive or hateful content. Furthermore, we explore the content of their posts using a transformer-based topic modeling approach.

Our findings reveal a substantial increase in user activity and toxicity levels following the migration of these subreddits to Lemmygrad.ml.

We also identify posts that support authoritarian regimes, endorse the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and feature anti-Zionist and antisemitic content.

Overall, our findings contribute to a more nuanced understanding of political extremism within decentralized social networks and emphasize the necessity of analyzing both ends of the political spectrum in research.

https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/40188039

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Chana@hexbear.net 11 points 3 days ago

The laxity of peer review depends on the field and which set of nerds the paper or conference organizers could cobble together. In many fields, particularly those heavy on math, conferences are more prestigious than journals most of the time. They all meet up a few times per year to compare notes, basically.

This was presented at a peer reviewed conference. Who knows how careful they were, but the entire subfield of social media analysis is a joke so it doesn't get much better than this. Just more obfuscatory.

PS in science it's also still garbage. So many reviewers put no effort in, have pettu grievances, are jealous of the work and hypercriticize it, or, most commomly, suggest you cite their own papers lest you be "unaware of seminal research on this topic". Passing peer review is not much of a filter, either. P-hacked garbage is rampant.

The real review of peers is when others try to build practically on published work. If it is truly wrong, they will fail and the field will eventually realize this. Most publications are ignored or not used meaningfully by others. They just pad resumes and end up on grant applications.