Now, you want me to believe private enterprise can help protect my privacy? That's going to be a tough sell. Private enterprise has given us a lot of really cool stuff. We've also payed a pretty heavy price for it. That's because the goal is rarely "Let's design product/service X to benefit people" but "What product/service can we design to pull maximum profit".
Your first goal is to convince me that private enterprise can do something altruistic.
But nobody honest can argue that. The question is, how can we make sure that the way for the private enterprise to maximize their profits is to design products/services to maximize people.
That doesn't make sense unless all the definitions I've read of HFT are wrong.
According to them, there's a seller that is willing to sell at price X, and a buyer that is willing to buy at price Y, such that Y > X. Then the HF comes and buys from the seller at price Z, such that Y > Z >= X, and then sells at Y to the buyer, making Y - Z as profit in the process (minus transaction fees, of course).
If HFTs weren't there, the seller would still sell to the buyer at price Y, which means that the share would still have the same price (since stock prices are, as far as I know, determined by the price at which the transactions are made).
How are they inflating share prices? It seems to me that the buyer is the one inflating.
If Wall Street adds no value to anyone else, why does anyone else do business with them? Why aren't they alone in their little world? Why do people invest in those markets?
And to answer the "why don't they put a stop to this" question -- the stock exchanges like having large number of quotes, as they charge for trades, so the more the better. They are acting in the interests of their own shareholders, to make money, and not in the interests of the participants of the market (who want a fair market).
Do they charge a fixed amount or a percentage of the trade value? Because if the latter, HFTs shouldn't count that much, right?
In any case, if the majority of the participants on the market don't want HF trading, where is the pressure on the stock exchanges to stop it? More: why hasn't a competing "non-HFT" exchange appeared?
HFTs certainly skim off the top of genuine traders and investors
Yes, those are the other players in the market that I mentioned. "Players" is the people involved, not just HFTs.
What they are doing is consuming the service to the detriment of other users, and extracting a tax with their unfair advantage over other users, while contributing exactly nothing back.
Which is why I said the other players (the non-HT traders) have an incentive to end that behavior, which is why it doesn't make sense that "nobody is particularly concerned with "fixing" the problem". They should be.
If anything, it's a transfer from the other players in the market, not "printing" money, so how are they not concerned about it? Most market players aren't HFTs.
How did they screw up? They just found a way to avoid having to raises prices like many providers (HP, Dell, etc) had to, or face a big cut in revenues like Intel did (project $1 billion!).
That's the Infrastructure-as-a-service offers. Then there's platform-as-a-service (e.g. App Engine, Heroku) and Software-as-a-service (e.g. Google Docs).
Essentially, cloud means: we abstract and automate everything from this level down, so you don't have to worry about it and can focus on everything above.
And yes, "cloud" is a buzzword for something that already existed. That doesn't mean the concept is bad or useless.
No, you realized they are not necessary for your happiness. (And being 'necessary' is a red herring. The question is whether they enhance it or not)
It's a good thing that you improved your life, but you shouldn't assume that everyone is like you. For example, I'm perfectly capable of owning a TV without spending time watching stupid shit on it (I mostly use it to watch good movies in good company).
Yeah, and what about all those food addicts? Needing a fix every day, sometimes multiple times a day! A disgrace I tell you!
(sarcasm aside, if your employees don't have a regular break where they can do anything - from smoking to just chatting - the problem is with your work environment)
I'm sure your health insurance company likes to blame that on smokers, but that's not how prices work. You're the one keeping the prices high; as long as you pay them, they have no incentive to lower them. Supply and demand drives prices, not so much costs.
Slashdot Mirror
Regulations are not a panacea, due to regulatory capture and unintended consequences.
That's the proles' lives. OP is describing the life of the Inner Party members.
Yeah, good luck with the first part.
Not anymore.
*benefit people, not maximize.
Now, you want me to believe private enterprise can help protect my privacy? That's going to be a tough sell. Private enterprise has given us a lot of really cool stuff. We've also payed a pretty heavy price for it. That's because the goal is rarely "Let's design product/service X to benefit people" but "What product/service can we design to pull maximum profit".
Your first goal is to convince me that private enterprise can do something altruistic.
But nobody honest can argue that. The question is, how can we make sure that the way for the private enterprise to maximize their profits is to design products/services to maximize people.
That doesn't make sense unless all the definitions I've read of HFT are wrong.
According to them, there's a seller that is willing to sell at price X, and a buyer that is willing to buy at price Y, such that Y > X. Then the HF comes and buys from the seller at price Z, such that Y > Z >= X, and then sells at Y to the buyer, making Y - Z as profit in the process (minus transaction fees, of course).
If HFTs weren't there, the seller would still sell to the buyer at price Y, which means that the share would still have the same price (since stock prices are, as far as I know, determined by the price at which the transactions are made).
How are they inflating share prices? It seems to me that the buyer is the one inflating.
If Wall Street adds no value to anyone else, why does anyone else do business with them? Why aren't they alone in their little world? Why do people invest in those markets?
And to answer the "why don't they put a stop to this" question -- the stock exchanges like having large number of quotes, as they charge for trades, so the more the better. They are acting in the interests of their own shareholders, to make money, and not in the interests of the participants of the market (who want a fair market).
Do they charge a fixed amount or a percentage of the trade value? Because if the latter, HFTs shouldn't count that much, right?
In any case, if the majority of the participants on the market don't want HF trading, where is the pressure on the stock exchanges to stop it? More: why hasn't a competing "non-HFT" exchange appeared?
HFTs certainly skim off the top of genuine traders and investors
Yes, those are the other players in the market that I mentioned. "Players" is the people involved, not just HFTs.
What they are doing is consuming the service to the detriment of other users, and extracting a tax with their unfair advantage over other users, while contributing exactly nothing back.
Which is why I said the other players (the non-HT traders) have an incentive to end that behavior, which is why it doesn't make sense that "nobody is particularly concerned with "fixing" the problem". They should be.
Or maybe the non-HFTs should complain and/or leave the stock exchange instead. They're the ones getting screwed.
If anything, it's a transfer from the other players in the market, not "printing" money, so how are they not concerned about it? Most market players aren't HFTs.
But they did have a reliable source. It just cost 300% because of the floods, so they hacked a cheaper solution.
How did they screw up? They just found a way to avoid having to raises prices like many providers (HP, Dell, etc) had to, or face a big cut in revenues like Intel did (project $1 billion!).
There is certainly "full-er" visualization, from simple Linux containers to full blown VMs.
Both Amazon and Microsoft itself (on Azure) offer Windows VMs, and I don't see why couldn't you run Exchange there.
That said, if your needs are fixed, there are probably cheaper solutions out there.
That's the Infrastructure-as-a-service offers. Then there's platform-as-a-service (e.g. App Engine, Heroku) and Software-as-a-service (e.g. Google Docs).
Essentially, cloud means: we abstract and automate everything from this level down, so you don't have to worry about it and can focus on everything above.
And yes, "cloud" is a buzzword for something that already existed. That doesn't mean the concept is bad or useless.
That's a problem mostly for historical fiction, not fantasy. When you have Trolls, having women is never "forced".
No, you realized they are not necessary for your happiness. (And being 'necessary' is a red herring. The question is whether they enhance it or not)
It's a good thing that you improved your life, but you shouldn't assume that everyone is like you. For example, I'm perfectly capable of owning a TV without spending time watching stupid shit on it (I mostly use it to watch good movies in good company).
Uh, no. That's only in the textbook fairyland of perfect competition.
Yes, fuck middle ground! It must be either very easy or illegal!
Yeah, and what about all those food addicts? Needing a fix every day, sometimes multiple times a day! A disgrace I tell you!
(sarcasm aside, if your employees don't have a regular break where they can do anything - from smoking to just chatting - the problem is with your work environment)
Health insurance rates go up because you pay them. Demand, not costs, raises prices.
I'm sure your health insurance company likes to blame that on smokers, but that's not how prices work. You're the one keeping the prices high; as long as you pay them, they have no incentive to lower them. Supply and demand drives prices, not so much costs.
Paulo "Pirate" Coelho.
Abolishing copyright and demand free work is a false dichotomy.
Study finds pirates 10 times more likely to buy music
I know that some people find this amazing, but people actually pay for things for reasons besides being The Law.