"The Nov. 3rd election was the most secure in American history," state and federal election officials said in a statement Thursday. "There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised." Bloomberg reports: The statement acknowledged the "many unfounded claims and opportunities for misinformation about the process of our elections" and urged Americans to turn to election administrators and officials for accurate information. The statement was signed by officials from the Elections Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council, which shares information among state, local and federal officials, and the Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating Council, which includes election infrastructure owners and operators.

Among the 10 signatories were Benjamin Hovland, who chairs the U.S. Election Assistance Commission, and Bob Kolasky, the assistant director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, part of the Department of Homeland Security. Key officials at the cybersecurity agency, including its head, Christopher Krebs, are stepping down or expecting to get fired as Trump refuses to concede. Krebs, who has enjoyed bipartisan support for his role in helping run secure U.S. elections in 2018 and 2020, has told associates he expects to be dismissed, according to three people familiar with internal discussions. His departure would follow the resignation of Bryan Ware, assistant director for cybersecurity at CISA, who resigned on Thursday morning after about two years at the agency. In addition, Valerie Boyd, the assistant secretary for international affairs at the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees CISA, has also left, according to two other people. Krebs and Ware are both Trump appointees.

Mike Allen, reporting for Axios: President Trump has told friends he wants to start a digital media company to clobber Fox News and undermine the conservative-friendly network, sources tell Axios. The state of play: Some Trump advisers think Fox News made a mistake with an early call (seconded by AP) of President-elect Biden's win in Arizona. [...] Here's Trump's plan, according to the source: There's been lots of speculation about Trump starting a cable channel. But getting carried on cable systems would be expensive and time-consuming. Instead, Trump is considering a digital media channel that would stream online, which would be cheaper and quicker to start. Trump's digital offering would likely charge a monthly fee to MAGA fans. Many are Fox News viewers, and he'd aim to replace the network -- and the $5.99-a-month Fox Nation streaming service, which has an 85% conversion rate from free trials to paid subscribers -- as their top destination. Trump's database of email and cellphone contacts would be a huge head start. Trump's lists are among the most valuable in politics -- especially his extensive database of cellphone numbers for text messages.

Long-time Slashdot reader AmiMoJo shares the Verge's report that U.S. President Donald Trump "will lose Twitter privileges he enjoys as a world leader when President-Elect Joe Biden takes office on January 20th, 2021." Twitter confirmed that Trump's @realDonaldTrump account will be subject to the same rules as any other user — including bans on inciting violence and posting false information about voting or the coronavirus pandemic.

Twitter applies special policies to world leaders and some other officials, leaving rule-breaking content online if there's "a clear public interest value to keeping the tweet on the service." The public interest policy was formalized in 2019, codifying a rule that had been informally enforced for some time... "This policy framework applies to current world leaders and candidates for office, and not private citizens when they no longer hold these positions," a Twitter spokesperson confirms to The Verge.

These changes will cover Trump's personal account. Position-specific accounts like @WhiteHouse, @POTUS, and @FLOTUS are transferred to a new administration after an outgoing president steps down.

"Uber helped wage a $200 million war in California to keep drivers as contractors," notes the Washington Post — successfully funding a ballot proposition that overrides a high-stakes 2019 law which insisted drivers be considered employees.

"But now that the ballot measure has passed, the company says its work isn't done..."

The ride-hailing giant's CEO said Thursday that Uber is looking to expand the model to other states, joining an executive from rival Lyft who said something similar earlier this week... "Going forward, you'll see us more loudly advocating for...laws like Prop 22," Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said, adding later: "We were the first to come forward with this [independent contractor]-plus model, the idea that drivers deserve flexibility plus benefits. We want to have a dialogue with governments [in] other states..."

Uber and Lyft's stocks have rallied this week, logging percentage gains in the double digits as investors reacted to the news that they would not have to make drivers employees.
The proposition promises independent contractors 120% of the minimum wage plus contributions to healthcare equivalent to what other employers currently provide (or half that amount for employees averaging less than 25 hours a week but more than 15). But the Post points out that "Unlike full employment, however, benefits are calculated based on a driver's active time, negating the potential hours per week they spend waiting for a fare while logged onto the apps..."

Uber's chief financial officer told the Post that the new benefits "will result in probably a 5% increase to cover the incremental [costs]," including benefits, adding "We do believe that it'll be manageable."

The Post adds that labor advocates "fiercely opposed Proposition 22, saying it was a transparent attempt to snatch newly enshrined employment rights from workers."

NBC reports that social media crackdowns on disinformation have been less consistent if the content isn't in English. One example? "Facebook and YouTube have taken steps to remove QAnon content in English from their platforms, but experts warn there is still a vast amount in Spanish." The misleading, false and conspiratorial claims that are circulating in Spanish about the outcome of the election are readily viewable on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, despite policies from all three companies prohibiting or restricting the spread of conspiracy theories and election-related misinformation. According to researchers interviewed by NBC News, the policies have been implemented with more consistency for content posted in English...

"Facebook and YouTube have taken steps to remove QAnon content in English from their platforms, but there is still a vast amount available in Spanish and it's easily accessible," said Flavia Colangelo, a researcher at GQR, a Democratic research firm that advises campaigns on Spanish-language disinformation...

Alex Joseph, a spokesperson for YouTube, said the company has policies against misinformation about how to vote but does not prohibit content that forwards false views about the outcome of the election. "Expressing views on the outcome of a current election or process of counting votes is allowed under our policy," Joseph said. "Our policies are global, and we apply them consistently across all languages and regions."

The night before America's election, Fast Company reported: On the internet, we're subject to hidden A/B tests all the time, but this one was also part of a political weapon: a multimillion-dollar tool kit built by a team of Facebook vets, data nerds, and computational social scientists determined to defeat Donald Trump. The goal is to use microtargeted ads, follow-up surveys, and an unparalleled data set to win over key electorates in a few critical states: the low-education voters who unexpectedly came out in droves or stayed home last time, the voters who could decide another monumental election. By this spring, the project, code named Barometer, appeared to be paying off. During a two-month period, the data scientists found that showing certain Facebook ads to certain possible Trump voters lowered their approval of the president by 3.6%...

"We've been able to really understand how to communicate with folks who have lower levels of political knowledge, who tend to be ignored by the political process," says James Barnes, a data and ads expert at the all-digital progressive nonprofit Acronym, who helped build Barometer. This is familiar territory: Barnes spent years on Facebook's ads team, and in 2016 was the "embed" who helped the Trump campaign take Facebook by storm. Last year, he left Facebook and resolved to use his battle-tested tactics to take down his former client. "We have found ways to find the right news to put in front of them, and we found ways to understand what works and doesn't," Barnes says. "And if you combine all those things together, you get a really effective approach, and that's what we're doing...."

By the election it promises to have spent $75 million on Facebook, Google, Instagram, Snapchat, Hulu, Roku, Viacom, Pandora, and anywhere else valuable voters might be found... Barnes had been a Republican all his life, but he did not like Trump; he says he ended up voting for Clinton. The election, and his role in it, left him unsettled, and he left Facebook's political ads team to work with the company's commercial clients... In the wake of Trump's election and its aftermath, Barnes helped Facebook develop some of its election integrity initiatives (one of Facebook's moves was to stop embedding employees like him inside campaigns) and even sat down for lengthy interviews with the Securities and Exchange Commission and with then-Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Last year, after some soul-searching, some of it in Peru, Barnes registered as a Democrat, left Facebook, and began working on a way to fight Trump... Acronym and a political action committee, Pacronym, were founded in 2017 by Democratic strategist Tara McGowan, in an effort to counter Trump's online spending advantage and what The New Yorker called his Facebook juggernaut...

For Barnes, Acronym's aggressive approach to Facebook, and Barometer's very existence, isn't just personal, but relates to his former employer: Facebook hasn't only failed to effectively police misinformation and disinformation, but helped accelerate it... But while Barnes is using some of the weapons that helped Trump, he's at pains to emphasize that, unlike the other side, Acronym's artillery is simply "the facts."
The PAC's donors include Laurene Powell Jobs, Steven Spielberg, venture capitalists Reid Hoffman and Michael Moritz, and (according to the Wall Street Journal) Facebook's former product officer, Chris Cox (who is also an informal adviser.)

But in addition, the group "can access an unprecedented pool of state voter files and personal information: everything from your purchasing patterns to your social media posts to your church, layered with AI-built scores that predict your traits..."

"BIDEN WINS" declares the all-caps headline at CNN.com.

And the headline at NBC News reads "JOE BIDEN DEFEATS DONALD TRUMP TO WIN THE WHITE HOUSE, NBC NEWS PROJECTS."

NBC News reports: Joe Biden became president-elect Saturday after winning the pivotal state of Pennsylvania, NBC News projected.

The former vice president amassed 273 Electoral College votes after winning Pennsylvania's 20 electors, according to NBC News, surpassing the 270 needed to win the White House and defeat President Donald Trump.

Biden's victory capped one of the longest and most tumultuous campaigns in modern history, in which he maintained an aggressive focus on Trump's widely criticized handling of the Covid-19 pandemic. A majority of voters said rising coronavirus cases were a significant factor in their vote, according to early results from the NBC News Exit Poll of early and Election Day voters.

Biden regularly criticized Trump as unfit for office and positioned his campaign as a "battle for the soul of America." He promised from the outset of his run to heal and unite the country if he won, and made central to his closing message a pledge to represent both those who voted for him as well as those who didn't when he got to the White House.

As president, Biden will immediately be confronted with a bitterly divided nation in the throes of a pandemic that has already killed 236,000 Americans.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from VICE: On Thursday night, Facebook announced it had activated "break glass" measures to try to quell the spread of disinformation, which has been supercharged by the lies being spread by President Donald Trump and his allies. The unprecedented move may have been triggered by Facebook's decision hours earlier to shut down a viral group called "Stop the Steal" that had racked up 360,000 in the space of 24 hours. The group was spreading disinformation, advocating for gun violence, and organizing real-world protests. But the impact of Facebook's moves has been negligible.

A VICE News investigation, using the Facebook-owned analytics tool CrowdTangle, found at least three active groups on Facebook using variations of the Stop the Steal name, all of which have tens of thousands of followers and all of which are sharing the same disinformation as the original group. The biggest group identified is called "StoptheSteal" which has almost 70,000 members. The next biggest is called "Stop the Steal 2.0" with 40,000 followers. Finally, a group with an identical name -- "Stop the Steal" -- has 25,800 members. By allowing the original group to grow so quickly, and to such a scale before removing it, Facebook could have inadvertently made the situation even worse, Ciaran O'Connor, an analyst at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, told VICE News. "The challenge in managing copycat groups is that there is additional potential for voter fraud disinformation and threats of violence among communities who may be motivated for further action given the removal of the original group, particularly around possible mobilization at election centers." "We are continuing to review additional content and activity and will take action accordingly," Facebook spokesman Andy Stone told VICE News.

Facebook plans to put the name of the winner of the US presidential election at the top of Facebook and Instagram once it's been projected by a majority of media outlets, the company says. From a report: The company also will label presidential candidates' posts with a link to its voting information center, according to Facebook spokesperson Tom Reynolds. The company plans to "show the candidate's name in notifications at the top of Facebook and Instagram that say 'A Presidential Winner Has Been Projected -- is the projected winner of the 2020 US Presidential Election,'" Reynolds explained in an email to The Verge. Facebook will rely on "a majority opinion from Reuters as well as independent decision desks at major media outlets, including ABC News, CBS News, Fox News, NBC News, CNN, and The Associated Press to determine when a presidential winner is projected," Reynolds says.

Anonymouse Cowtard writes: When you're holding millions in bets on the favorite, you don't take the decision to payout lightly. Betting agencies are often good barometers for political polls, but Sportsbet has been stung before. They incorrectly paid out on bets for the Labor Party in Australia to win two days before the election was held, assuming a victory would come to the polling leaders. That party lost.

According to Bloomberg, "Sportsbet has decided to pay out early on Joe Biden to be elected as the U.S President even with the official result still not known, according to a statement. The online bookmaker has deemed Biden's lead as 'unassailable' after CNN projected Michigan would go to the Democrats and that he holds the ascendancy in Nevada and Arizona. Sportsbet has paid out over 100,000 bets to punters who backed Biden."

Portland, Maine is the latest in the growing list of cities in the US to ban facial recognition technologies. From a report: According to Bangor Daily News, people voted in favor of of passing a new measure that strengthens Portland's existing ban on the use of facial recognition tech by law enforcement agencies and public officials. City councilors originally agreed on a ban back in August with the understanding that the voter referendum would replace their ordinance if it passes. Now that it has passed, it can't be touched for at least five years. Back in September, Portland, Oregon passed what could be the strictest municipal ban on facial recognition in the country -- one that prohibits even private businesses from deploying the technology in public spaces.

President Trump attacked legitimate vote-counting efforts in remarks from the White House early Wednesday, suggesting attempts to tally all ballots amounted to disenfranchising his supporters, CNN reports. From the report: "Millions and millions of people voted for us," Trump said in the East Room. "A very sad group of people is trying to disenfranchise that group of people." His remarks were laced with misleading statements and outright falsehoods and amounted to an assault on the Democratic process. He insisted that states where vote tallies currently show him leading should be called in his favor, despite significant outstanding votes yet to be counted. He said he was preparing to declare victory earlier in the evening. "We were getting ready for a big celebration. We were winning everything. And all of a sudden it was just called off," he said. Trump baselessly claimed a fraud was being committed. "This is a fraud on the American public. This is an embarrassment to our country," Trump claimed. "Frankly we did win this election," he said, despite millions of votes still outstanding. Saying he would go to the US Supreme Court, Trump said he wanted "all voting to stop." Further reading:
Biden urges patience as Trump threatens court action (The New York Times);
Trump falsely and prematurely claims election victory (Axios);
Trump baselessly claims 'fraud' amid nail-biter results (The Guardian);
Trump falsely declares victory: 'We already have won' (ABC News);
Trump tries to claim victory; Biden says votes still being tallied (NPR);
and No clear winner in presidential race as vote counting continues, election hangs in balance. (Fox News)

Oregonians have voted to pass Measure 109 to become the first state in the country to legalize psilocybin. OregonLive reports: Measure 109 was passing by 59.25% Tuesday when the polls closed in Oregon. Multiple cities have decriminalized the substance, but Oregon will become the first to permit supervised use statewide if that majority holds. The measure [...] will allow regulated use of psychedelic mushrooms in a therapeutic setting.

It creates a two-year period during which regulatory details will be worked out, including what qualifications are required of therapists overseeing its use. [P]silocybin could help people struggling with issues from depression to anxiety to addiction. The new law will allow anyone age 21 or older who passes a screening to access the services for "personal development." But the law won't mean that "magic" mushrooms have the same legal status as cannabis. Instead, it will allow psilocybin to be stored and administered at licensed facilities. Oregonians also voted to pass Measure 110, which will decriminalize possession of small amounts of drugs, including psychedelic mushrooms.

A text message campaign, claiming to be from the FBI, is targeting people in Michigan with misinformation about "ballot sensor issues." According to The Verge, citing The Washington Post, "The messages claim a 'typographical error' is causing people who voted for Joe Biden to have their votes switched to President Trump, and people who voted for Trump to have their votes switched to Biden." From the report: In Flint, robocalls have been trying to trick people into voting tomorrow (which is not allowed) due to supposedly long lines at polling stations. Nessel debunked this claim too, tweeting: "Getting reports of multiple robocalls going to Flint residents that, due to long lines, they should vote tomorrow. Obviously this is FALSE and an effort to suppress the vote. No long lines and today is the last day to vote. Don't believe the lies! Have your voice heard! RT PLS."

These campaigns are just two of the many efforts to spread doubt about the outcome of the 2020 presidential election. In a separate campaign, robocallers have been warning people to "stay safe and stay home," according to The Washington Post. The calls, which began over the summer, have increased leading up to the election -- targeting nearly every city in the US. While they do not mention the 2020 race, one source told the Post: "I think they mean stay home and don't vote." Voters in swing states have received the most misinformation about voting by mail leading up to the 2020 election, according to The New York Times. Between September 1st and October 29th, Pennsylvania saw 227,907 mail-in voting rumors, according to media intelligence company Zignal Labs.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Less than 24 hours before a historic US presidential election day, Nick Clegg, Facebook's vice president of global affairs and communications and the former United Kingdom deputy prime minister, tried to rally employees at the embattled social networking corporation. Noting that the world would be watching the results, Clegg published a post on an internal message board about the work Facebook employees had done to prepare for the vote. Many things had changed since 2016, he said, alluding to an election in which Russian state actors used Facebook to sow discord, while the company and CEO Mark Zuckerberg stood by oblivious. "We have transformed the way we approach elections since the U.S. presidential election four years ago," Clegg wrote in the note titled "READY FOR ELECTION DAY." "Thanks to the efforts of far, far too many of you to mention by name, Facebook is a very different company today." It is indeed. Roiled by months of internal scandals and high-profile failures, the social network giant heads into Election Day with employee morale cratering and internal political discussion muzzled on internal message boards.

While Clegg took an optimistic tone in his post, Facebook released results of an internal survey on Monday that revealed a stark decline in employee confidence over the past six months. Its semi-annual "Pulse Survey," taken by more than 49,000 employees over two weeks in October, showed workers felt strained by office shutdowns and were continuing to lose faith that the company was improving the world. Only 51% of respondents said they believed that Facebook was having a positive impact on the world, down 23 percentage points from the company's last survey in May and down 5.5 percentage points from the same period last year. In response to a question about the company's leadership, only 56% of employees had a favorable response, compared to 76% in May and more than 60% last year. (A Facebook employee acknowledged in the announcement that the uptick in May's Pulse results were "likely driven by our response to COVID-19," which was widely praised.)

Zeynep Tufekci, writing at The New York Times: There's a strong case for ignoring the predictions. Why do we have models? Why can't we just consider polling averages? Well, presidents are not elected by a national vote total but by the electoral votes of each state, so national polls do not give us the information we need. As two of the last five elections showed -- in 2000 and 2016 -- it's possible to win the popular vote and lose the Electoral College. Models give us a way to process polls of various quality in 50 states to arrive at a forecast. There are two broad ways to model an event: using "fundamentals" -- mechanisms that can affect the event -- and probabilities -- measurements like polls. For elections, fundamentals would be historically informed lessons like, "a better economy favors incumbents." With polls, there is no theory about why they are the way they are. We just use the numbers they produce.

Electoral forecast modelers run simulations of an election based on various inputs -- including state and national polls, polling on issues and information about the economy and the national situation. If they ran, say, 1,000 different simulations with various permutations of those inputs, and if Joe Biden got 270 electoral votes in 800 of them, the forecast would be that Mr. Biden has an 80 percent chance of winning the election. This is where weather and electoral forecasts start to differ. For weather, we have fundamentals -- advanced science on how atmospheric dynamics work -- and years of detailed, day-by-day, even hour-by-hour data from a vast number of observation stations. For elections, we simply do not have anything near that kind of knowledge or data. While we have some theories on what influences voters, we have no fine-grained understanding of why people vote the way they do, and what polling data we have is relatively sparse.

Consequently, most electoral forecasts that are updated daily -- like those from FiveThirtyEight or The Economist -- rely heavily on current polls and those of past elections, but also allow fundamentals to have some influence. Since many models use polls from the beginning of the modern primary era in 1972, there are a mere 12 examples of past presidential elections with dependable polling data. That means there are only 12 chances to test assumptions and outcomes, though it's unclear what in practice that would involve. A thornier problem is that unlike weather events, presidential elections are not genuine "repeat" events. Facebook didn't play a major role in elections until probably 2012. Twitter, without which Mr. Trump thinks he might not have won, wasn't even founded until 2006. How much does an election in 1972, conducted when a few broadcast channels dominated the public sphere, tell us about what might happen in 2020? Interpreting electoral forecasts correctly is yet another challenge. If a candidate wins an election with 53 percent of the vote, that would be a decisive victory. If a probability model gives a candidate a 53 percent chance of winning, that means that if we ran simulations of the election 100 times, that candidate would win 53 times and the opponent 47 times -- almost equal odds.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: The group of Russian hackers accused of meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election earlier this year targeted the email accounts of Democratic state parties in California and Indiana, and influential think tanks in Washington and New York, according to people with knowledge of the matter. The attempted intrusions, many of which were internally flagged by Microsoft Corp over the summer, were carried out by a group often nicknamed "Fancy Bear." The hackers' activity provides insight into how Russian intelligence is targeting the United States in the run-up to the Nov. 3 election. The targets identified by Reuters, which include the Center for American Progress, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Washington-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said they had not seen any evidence of successful hacking attempts.

Fancy Bear is controlled by Russia's military intelligence agency and was responsible for hacking the email accounts of Hillary Clinton's staff in the run-up to the 2016 election, according to a Department of Justice indictment filed in 2018. News of the Russian hacking activity follows last month's announcement here by Microsoft that Fancy Bear had attempted to hack more than 200 organizations, many of which the software company said were tied to the 2020 election. Microsoft was able to link this year's cyber espionage campaign to the Russian hackers through an apparent programming error that allowed the company to identify a pattern of attack unique to Fancy Bear, according to a Microsoft assessment reviewed by Reuters. The thrust of espionage operations could not be determined by Reuters. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence said in August here that Russian operations were attempting to undermine the campaign of presidential candidate Joe Biden.

Facebook revealed Thursday how internal technical glitches had disrupted the delivery of some ads from the Joe Biden and Donald Trump campaigns, but said it made changes to resolve those hiccups in the run-up to the November U.S. presidential election. From a report: The social media giant's admission followed complaints from the Biden camp about how thousands of its ads had been blocked. Facebook said in a blog post it spotted "unanticipated issues" affecting both campaigns, including technical flaws that caused a number of ads to be "paused improperly." "No ad was paused or rejected by a person, or because of any partisan consideration," Facebook said in its post. "The technical problems were automated and impacted ads from across the political spectrum and both Presidential campaigns."

Hackers stole $2.3 million from the Wisconsin Republican Party's account that was being used to help reelect President Donald Trump in the key battleground state, the party's chairman told The Associated Press on Thursday. From a report: The party noticed the suspicious activity on Oct. 22 and contacted the FBI on Friday, said Republican Party Chairman Andrew Hitt. Hitt said the FBI is investigating. The attack was discovered less than two weeks before Election Day as both Trump and Democratic rival Joe Biden made their final push to win Wisconsin and its 10 electoral votes. Trump won the state by fewer than 23,000 votes in 2016 and planned his third visit in seven days on Friday. Biden also planned to campaign in Wisconsin on Friday. Polls have consistently shown a tight race in the state, usually with Biden ahead by single digits and within the margin of error.

About half of Americans on both sides of the aisle back the Justice Department's antitrust lawsuit against Google, while fewer than a third oppose it, according to a new poll from progressive groups Demand Progress and Data for Progress shared exclusively with Axios. From a report: There's a growing pile of evidence that regulatory action against Big Tech has bipartisan support, as state and federal antitrust action circles companies like Google and Facebook. While there are many party-line splits on tech policy issues like content moderation, privacy and misinformation, more policymakers and average Americans than ever agree tech is too big and powerful. Winning antitrust suits represents a massive lift for the government and passing new antitrust legislation is hard. In an online survey of 979 likely voters polled by Demand Progress and the Demand Progress Education Fund from October 24-25 (with a margin of error of +-3.1 percentage points), 48% said they strongly or somewhat support the DOJ's lawsuit. 32% strongly or somewhat oppose it. The numbers were fairly consistent across both parties, with 52% of Republicans supporting the suit, compared to 49% of Democrats. 26% of Republicans polled opposed it, while 32% of Democrats did.