Five

Yes, they are suspected right-wing bots separated from the data-set based on a set of criteria that marks them as outliers.

The “supersharers” and “superconsumers” of fake news sources—those accountable for 80% of fake news sharing or exposure—dwarfed typical users in their affinity for fake news sources and, furthermore, in most measures of activity. For example, on average per day, the median super- sharer of fake news (SS-F) tweeted 71.0 times, whereas the median panel member tweeted only 0.1 times. The median SS-F also shared an average of 7.6 political URLs per day, of which 1.7 were from fake news sources. Similarly, the median superconsumer of fake news sources had almost 4700 daily exposures to political URLs, as compared with only 49 for the median panel member (additional statistics in SM S.9). The SS-F members even stood out among the overall supersharers and superconsumers, the most politically active accounts in the panel (Fig. 2). Given the high volume of posts shared or consumed by superspreaders of fake news, as well as indicators that some tweets were authored by apps, we find it likely that many of these accounts were cyborgs: partially automated accounts controlled by humans (15) (SM S.8 and S.9). Their tweets included some self-authored content, such as personal commentary or photos, but also a large volume of political re-tweets. For subsequent analyses, we set aside the supersharer and superconsumer outlier accounts and focused on the remaining 99% of the panel.

It's not even close to fake news. Logarithmic scales are standard in this kind of visualization. The thrust of the result is that right-wing people share more fake news, and if you look at the graph, this is clear. If you mistake the X-axis as a linear scale, the result makes the effect less pronounced, not more.

So if anything, the graph undersells the thesis in the name of creating a more compact and readable visualization. There is no deception here.

A classic.

The code is completely written in JavaScript, so all the code is readable if you look at the source, which is also available on the GitHub page. https://stablenarwhal.github.io/LemmyInstanceMover/js/script.js

It looks like it uses a Lemmy API endpoint to transfer account settings.

Runs entirely in js? https://github.com/StableNarwhal/LemmyInstanceMover

Pas vraiment. Juste un gros utilisateur de traduction automatique et de copier-coller.

Very nice! What method do you use to press the flowers?

@disguy_ovahea has no idea what he's talking about. He apparently attended a couple of protests and thinks he's now an expert on social change.

A horse race has about as much to do with women's right to vote as Stonehenge does with climate change, but that didn't stop Emily Davison's direct action at the 1913 Epsom Derby from being a watershed moment in the struggle for women's suffrage.

A successful protest reaches people outside of a cause, compelling them to learn more, in hopes that they ultimately become a supporter.

Performative radicalized protests are only compelling to those already behind the cause, and immediately discredited by those you need to reach.

That's not how any of this works.

A protests' success is judged by how much publicity it receives, and the disproportionate scale of the reaction from antagonists to the movement. Colin Kaepernick kneeling during the national anthem was a successful protest because he was a public figure and had a national stage, and the reaction of conservatives throwing fits over a symbolic gesture highlighted the racism typically hidden in polite white society. The police riot in Selma got national attention because of the graphic scenes of white police beating black folks in Sunday dress, and the scale of the police response to people engaging in peaceful protest revealed the violence inherent in Jim Crow apartheid.

Likewise, the Stonehenge protest was extremely successful because it received international attention, and the disproportionate outrage over harmless dust compared to the real threat of climate change puts a spotlight to the widespread apathy of society to the threat.

You think protests are supposed to reach you specifically, because you're sympathetic to the protests old enough to read about in history books. But your opinion of those protests is mediated by the society that those protests have already successfully altered. The moderate of the past would have considered those historical protests 'performative' and 'radicalized' as well. They would also be on the wrong side of history.

I really like her project, focus, and presentation. I appreciate that video makers need to have some kind of income.

Whenever BetterHelp is used to sponsor a video, I think this video (YT) should also appear.

I'm not calling for censorship of videos that use it as a sponsor, just spreading awareness of that vendor's reputation and history. I know that making content for YouTube is an extremely stressful job, and having a reliable source of income greatly reduces that anxiety. I hope Abby Cox continues to make great videos, I really appreciate her attention to detail and thoughtfulness and empathy for people who most of society has swept under the rug.

No.