738
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 23 Oct 2026
738 points (99.5% liked)
News
39710 readers
1529 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
That depends on if it's happening to both parties or only happening to one party for some reason...
Wouldn't be hard to game.
Just use a scheme where it selects the closest candidate to the "touch", then offset the calibration such that it thinks a touch on #2 is #1. Then tapping on #1 will still select #1 because it's the closest, while tapping #2 will select #1 because the tap thinks it's closest to it.
So if the Republican candidate is always #1, then I'd bet it's deliberate. Actually, all it needs is for the Democratic candidate to be #2 to split the Democratic vote, though then it runs the risk of splitting the Republican vote as well (assuming the "miscalibration" is linear, if it's non-linear, then it could get "more correct" the further along the screen it goes).
If it was unintentional, you'd expect to see no specific party benefiting from the errors overall. Ie, in some locations it favours red, some blue, and in others one of the other candidates. Though even with this, if the distribution ends up such that it favours blue in blue strongholds and red in battleground areas, then that's still fishy.
Seems like a good reason to maybe have random ordering? Then it would need to be reading the content to be able to properly change things instead of something a little less obvious like screen calibration.
Absolutely, then you could do statistical analysis on the positions to see if any position is biased (for or against) and detect the problem and recalibrate the screen and no one candidate would gain that much of an advantage (well, candidates that weren't going to get many votes would benefit, but not to the point where they'd be able to steal an election).
But that assumes they are being run in good faith.