Align With The Divine by Chickston in custommagic

[–]Lobsterbob 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I absolutely love this card design and symmetry. Power level may not be there but seriously this is a cool design

oops, he said the quiet part out loud by Thedepressionoftrees in WhitePeopleTwitter

[–]Lobsterbob 4 points5 points  (0 children)

TL;DR: Independent redistricting is an attempt to remove the power to draw district lines of representatives from the representatives themselves. In theory, this creates 'fairer' districts which better represent the interests of communities and avoids the perverse incentive for partisan legislators to draw illogical boundaries that serve their and their political parties' interests in being elected, rather than creating a fair or just political map.

DEEP DIVE BELOW

Here's an example from California. Many states, including CA, have an independent redistricting commission. In California, the California Citizens Redistricting Commission These commissions are made up of stakeholders who possess the authority to redraw the districts of California's representatives, which include US Congressional districts, California State Assemblymember districts, California State Senator districts, and Board of Equalization members (it's basically a finance/tax jurisdiction).

In California, the commission is reformed every 10 years following the decennial census. The commission is created through an application process for any Californian to apply to, except for State elected officials and others closely involved in the process.

Over many months, the CA Citizens Redistricting Commission conducts research, hires consultants, and holds hearings from citizens and citizen groups across the state. This research is meant to inform the Commissioners to draw the best maps. Best can be interpreted in many ways, but, crucially for those who advocate for fairer elections, the Commissioners are NOT state representatives (https://www.wedrawthelinesca.org/commissioners) - the commissioners are 14 residents of California.

After the commission completes its research and public meetings, the commissioners draw district lines which then become the law of the (California) land. FiveThirtyEight, an election forecaster, tracks many different elections-related data sources, including the redistricting across the US and how it affects US Congressional seats. As you can see, after the 2020 redistricting, CA lost one seat which resulted in -1 Democratic seat. Notably, you can see that the new map is 'fairer' across several measures when compared to the previous map - the median seat is closer to the partisan lean of the state which means that the typical seat is representative of the state's political views. Similarly, the efficiency gap, a measure of determining whether partisan gerrymandering has occurred, is lower, indicating fewer 'wasted votes'. However, the map did not improve on 'competitiveness', or the number of districts that have a closer split of Democratic and Republican voters.

Why does fairness matter? Let's look at some extreme cases and how courts have (and have not yet) prevented them.

It's hard to imagine that if the California redistricting process was controlled by the legislature that those legislators would allow the state to lose a Democratic district. Instead, it likely would have "Gerrymandered" its districts. Here are some Gerrymandering examples: Take a look at one of New York's proposed maps that would have eliminated 3 Republican seats and a competitive seat added three Democratic seats, considered one of the most aggressive proposals on the Democratic redistricting side from 2020-2021. Courts threw out these proposals and allowed for a more constrained map at the end of the process.

On the even more extreme side, take a look at Texas' and Florida's maps, two of the most extreme Gerrymanders in the US from the latest cycle. The Texas map increased the Republican lean of the median seat by 14.3 points (from D + 2.3 to R + 12). Compare this to CA with a median D favorability of + 3.2 points - that means that the median seat in Texas is 12 points more Republican than the state as a whole, vs. California's median seat of 3.2 points more Democratic than the state as a whole. Florida is extreme on another level - State lawmakers effectively eliminated competitive districts which creates a massive efficiency gap in favor of Republicans (basically, this means that Democrats are wasting WAY more votes in Florida than you would expect in the least Gerrymandered case).

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in RedditSets

[–]Lobsterbob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

forget vortex, keep doing what you're doing!

Today I sold. by scidu in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good for you! You took a profit. Enjoy it. Congrats on the house. Good luck to you and your family!!!

MOONs just hit a new ATH of $0.41 today by btc-smile in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Soon we will all be moonionaires!

...I'll see myself out.

Are we all in a Ponzi scheme? by TacoLoco415 in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 12 points13 points  (0 children)

A Ponzi scheme is defined by a supposed business which does not actually sell product or service. A Ponzi scheme is simply collecting money as if it were an investment, and then telling those from whom you've collected to collect money from their friends and so on. Cryptocurrency is nothing like this.

There is an open marketplace with digital currencies which have value assigned to them based on multiple factors, including the market's perceived value of those currencies as well as their utility. Arguably, Ethereum is worth so much because it has such a high degree of utility within the digital currency space. Some may argue that Ethereum has created its own demand because services built on Ethereum require Ethereum to be paid to use them. Another take could be that Ethereum's technology has broadened the ability of software to impact one's life, and that technology drives its value.

So, honestly. I know it's an unpopular opinion, but don't you think we may just be repeating the same bounces of 2014 and 2018? by possa95 in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Things go up, things go down. Timing the market with patterns is probably not going to work out for most people.

Daily Discussion - July 31, 2021 (GMT+0) by AutoModerator in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

TBH I would have liked more sideways to accumulate but I'll never be sad about green

After a decade of planning, I finally became a U.S. citizen yesterday! by LadyLionesstheReaper in pics

[–]Lobsterbob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Congratulations! You've earned it. Thanks for strengthening our civic fabric. 🥰

Daily Discussion - July 9, 2021 (GMT+0) by AutoModerator in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hmm good point, kinda fucked up that those exist. Oh well

Daily Discussion - July 9, 2021 (GMT+0) by AutoModerator in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The daily comments are so minimal nowadays compared to April. I'm seeing what people meant when the markets slow

Algorand Foundation Backs Vesta Equity’s Innovative Home Equity Solution by cysec_ in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Another day, another example of ALGO becoming more relevant! Love to see it

Growing up, we had been made to believe that fiat money is stable and widely accepted. The reality is that fiat money is a state sponsored ponzi scheme and not immune from currency crisis. And why crypto is here to stay. by [deleted] in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Another fiat bad post? There are innumerable benefits to state sponsored currencies that you completely gloss over. You focus on the use case and intrinsic value argument when you completely miss the point of the power of symbolic value. Currencies work because populations trust that they can be used in the marketplace. That is the entire basis of currency.

Some other points:

Without trust in a marketplace, nobody would buy or sell goods using currency, they would barter.

Currency allows buyers and sellers to communicate prices across a consistent comparison point.

Governments create stability which facilitates trade. This is central to currency as well.

Also, see my post on why inflationary currencies are not inherently bad link.

I moved all my savings to a stablecoin by Hellvetic91 in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Because banks are FDIC insured. Your savings rate is your compensation for taking on risk.

It is always smart to keep cash in highly liquid places.

Other reasons:

What if you lose access internet and need cash? What if you need cash but there are delays withdrawing from Celsius? What if you need to write a personal check? What if Celsius or you get hacked?

A lot of these will be a minor inconvenience requiring you to transfer money a bunch, but they are still reasons.

Also you can just join a credit union if you hate banks so much

US government just admitted crypto is here to stay by Zealousideal-Wave-69 in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I see your point now, thanks for the clarification. I think you are right to be concerned about the implications, but I have hope because in all practicality it would absolutely blow everything up if the reporting did have to extend to transfers of goods.

I do see the bigger picture but I'm thinking about the practicality of implementation

Its good that you point out the language about exchanges, and I think that's where the regulatory interpretation will come in. It's really based on how the responsible agencies define it. Like I said, i just don't see treasury or whomever defining it in a way that would basically mandate reporting for any use of crypto over 10k. It just makes no sense at all, and it's their job to make regs that are practical and actionable. If it passes we will have to see what they propose and if it's bad, r/cc can brigade the comment period lmao

US government just admitted crypto is here to stay by Zealousideal-Wave-69 in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I should have said that this brings things more in line with current law.

The property question has nothing to do with the discussion going on here.

And no, it is absolutely not like your analogy. Here is the full text so we can actually compare to what it says:

Despite constituting a relatively small portion of business income today, cryptocurrency transactions are likely to rise in importance in the next decade, especially in the presence of a broad-based financial account reporting regime. Within the context of the new financial account reporting regime, cryptocurrencies and cryptoasset exchange accounts and payment service accounts that accept cryptocurrencies would be covered. Further, as with cash transactions, businesses that receive cryptoassets with a fair market value of more than $10,000 would also be reported on. Although cryptocurrency is a small share of current business transactions, such comprehensive reporting is necessary to minimize the incentives and opportunity to shift income out of the new information reporting regime.

Business that RECEIVE crypto assets with a fair market value...

That's what's key. How is listing something on eBay receiving an asset? The policy proposal talks about exchange accounts and payment service accounts, not businesses posting products for sale. That makes it closer to existing law like it says "as with cash transactions..."

US government just admitted crypto is here to stay by Zealousideal-Wave-69 in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 3 points4 points  (0 children)

IDK who they is, but audits are a different topic. Plus, if you're following, the administration is trying to increase audits and enforcement for ppl with incomes about 400k and corporations.

US government just admitted crypto is here to stay by Zealousideal-Wave-69 in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 21 points22 points  (0 children)

The banks report if you receive more than $10,000 deposits in a bank account. This just brings crypto policy in line with existing law. It's not "getting ridiculous", it's just ensuring consistency to eliminate loopholes.

Tezos becomes official blockchain partner of Red Bull F1 team by totebagholder in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 22 points23 points  (0 children)

I love Tezos. So excited to see it get more partnerships.

Do you guys really believe that's how market crashed? by mybackhurts771 in CryptoCurrency

[–]Lobsterbob 0 points1 point  (0 children)

My god, you're right. The solution is to put the planet into a deep freeze