Danterious

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/25287498

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/19638259

There are about 6 pages.dev domains spamming lemmy.world communities

The volume is definitely inorganic, and is across a wide range of communities

pages.dev is Cloudflare's site hosting which can be used for free - there are likely many legitimate sites that use that domain, but the current flood is suspicious

chronicleresolve.pages.dev

thefreedomproject.pages.dev

versarch.pages.dev

dailypulse.pages.dev

newssphere-6fu.pages.dev

iniko.pages.dev

miniza.pages.dev

orino.pages.dev

I'm cross posting because @[email protected] seems to be doing the same thing.

It might be an attack vector or something idk but better safe than sorry.

Not sure about this one but seems to be following same pattern.

@marvelous_[email protected]

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/25357952

I saw this and thought this would be useful in noticing and analyzing trends across the web and fediverse in specific. Which could help with noticing and finding disinformation.

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

I saw this and thought this would be useful in noticing and analyzing trends across the web and fediverse in specific. Which could help with noticing and finding disinformation.

~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/24292479

Abstract:

Although hundreds of dialogue programs geared towards conflict resolution are offered every year, there have been few scientific studies of their effectiveness.

Across 2 studies we examined the effect of controlled, dyadic interactions on attitudes towards the ‘other’ in members of groups involved in ideological conflict. Study 1 involved Mexican immigrants and White Americans in Arizona, and Study 2 involved Israelis and Palestinians in the Middle East. Cross-group dyads interacted via video and text in a brief, structured, face-to-face exchange: one person was assigned to write about the difficulties of life in their society (‘perspective-giving’), and the second person was assigned to accurately summarize the statement of the first person (‘perspective-taking’).

Positive changes in attitudes towards the outgroup were greater for Mexican immigrants and Palestinians after perspective-giving and for White Americans and Israelis after perspective-taking. For Palestinians, perspective-giving to an Israeli effectively changed attitudes towards Israelis, while a control condition in which they wrote an essay on the same topic without interacting had no effect on attitudes, illustrating the critical role of being heard.

Thus, the effects of dialogue for conflict resolution depend on an interaction between dialogue condition and participants' group membership, which may reflect power asymmetries.

Abstract:

Although hundreds of dialogue programs geared towards conflict resolution are offered every year, there have been few scientific studies of their effectiveness.

Across 2 studies we examined the effect of controlled, dyadic interactions on attitudes towards the ‘other’ in members of groups involved in ideological conflict. Study 1 involved Mexican immigrants and White Americans in Arizona, and Study 2 involved Israelis and Palestinians in the Middle East. Cross-group dyads interacted via video and text in a brief, structured, face-to-face exchange: one person was assigned to write about the difficulties of life in their society (‘perspective-giving’), and the second person was assigned to accurately summarize the statement of the first person (‘perspective-taking’).

Positive changes in attitudes towards the outgroup were greater for Mexican immigrants and Palestinians after perspective-giving and for White Americans and Israelis after perspective-taking. For Palestinians, perspective-giving to an Israeli effectively changed attitudes towards Israelis, while a control condition in which they wrote an essay on the same topic without interacting had no effect on attitudes, illustrating the critical role of being heard.

Thus, the effects of dialogue for conflict resolution depend on an interaction between dialogue condition and participants' group membership, which may reflect power asymmetries.