I think the theatrics are 'part' of the goal - but the real goal is money and social conditioning.
As far as money, as long as the TSA and DHS keep the 'terrorist threats everywhere' narrative alive, Congress will continue to throw taxpayer money at these agencies to waste on worthless unskilled employees (TSA agents) and 'mysterious technological devices' that cost a ton of money. Under this idea, it does not matter whether AIT machines are effective for their actual declared purpose - they are an effective part of the 'social conditioning' goal which is to make the American people believe that the Government has control of the situation.
As far as social conditioning, it has become more obvious that people in control of this country (and the world) will do anything to maintain their control. The TSA serves to undermine and erode individual civil liberties - it is there to make people get used to willingly giving up their rights. Of course the TSA, left unchallenged, will eventually end up in all venues or transportation centers. If the TSA or DHS were not interested in total expansion throughout the US, you would be hearing Janet Napolitano talking more often on the legal limits of the DHS.
And further, this is just my opinion.. This is how I interpret the situation. But, I am posting this with reservations wondering if this will get me put on a 'list' somewhere. I cannot be the only one deathly afraid of the direction of the US Government and completely fearless of any terrorist threat.
I like your solution.. Mine, in previous posts, was to add a random delay (less than a second) to all trades and apply a tax. The tax would be very minute - it would go unnoticed to everyone except the people making a ton of trades.
Actually, I would much prefer the enforcement of copyright law to be on the copyright holder instead of the taxpayer. If we're stuck with silly copyright laws, we might as well avoid paying to enforce it.
I don't even know what Prussian Blue is.. but trying to associate Ron Paul with the extreme outliers in his group of supporters is an error in reasoning. Ron Paul has some screwed up groups that support him; Ron Paul does not support the screwed up groups.
I can't tell if I get more disappointed by seeing tired parrot arguments like these or seeing tired parrot arguments like these get modded insightful. Ron Paul could provide free medical care to a black family, declare his hero to be Martin Luther King, and expose the racism in the drug war and uninformed people would still call him racist because of some implications in newsletters he didn't write.
Failures? You quote a random media rag and declare his entire congressional record a paperweight.. Ron Paul has written books, served in Congress for 12 terms, created a movement, and raised awareness about the erosion of liberty.. but you have a 700-word opinion piece. Clearly, you've done your research.
Judging from the complete corporate-bought shit that most of Congress produces, I could agree with you if your original statement was, "Ron Paul has failed to produce the same pile of shit that the rest of Congress produces."
Wow.. you say this like you know the future of the US is on solid ground. Yet we're knee-deep in a 9/11 reactionary society that mirrors all sci-fi genre's ideas of the worst future for mankind.
I am almost certain the new 'convenience' that we already used to have but lost will be introduced after a company makes millions introducing some newfangled technology that rips off our government (really.. the taxpayers). It works like this:
Step 1: Add major inconvenience due to 'security' Step 2: Consult with private consultants (read.. former government officials) on how to get rid of new inconvenience and make a ton of money Step 3: Purchase new unproven technology for all airports with taxpayer dollars and make 'private industry' friends rich
This is how it worked with the backscatter machines and this is how it will work with the new 'laser scanners.'
Maybe I am just playing devil's advocate, but you seem confident in calling Burzynski a quack. But I would assume your only evidence of calling Burzynski a quack is other people calling Burzynski a quack unless you have personal experience with Burzynski.
The fact is that the medical community as a whole has not cured cancer. Yet, the medical community supposedly decides what is the right way and wrong way of treating cancer patients. So outsiders, like Burzynski, face huge uphill battles in order to do anything different. Yet, something different than exists is what is needed to cure cancer.
As far as litigious behavior, let him threaten to sue. Maybe the truth will come out. I am sure if I posted all sorts of criticisms about my doctor that he did not believe were true, he would threaten to sue me too.
The rate of cancer survival in the medical industry is pretty bad ~ shouldn't the entire industry be criticized more?
We dealt with the USB key problem at a chemical plant. They got Conficker in one of the distributed systems my company installed. (Rockwell FactoryTalk) Even though our computers were configured with group policies to ignore thumb drives, other infected computers (different systems integrator) infected ours as well. We ended up sending group policies to the rest of the computers on the network and then removing the infection..
Operators had been plugging in their cell phones into the HMI computers to charge.. They got recognized (windows default) as a removeable disk.
So, yes.. there is more than just keeping plant networks off the Internet.. Plants also need to keep skilled IT people around to maintain their control systems just like they keep instrument technicians and electricians. However, most plants I have seen are severely understaffed in the IT arena.
Physical keys are used for the lockout/tagout procedure during maintenance cycles. But, there is usually no reason for physical keys at the operator terminal. Usually, you have to check in at a guard shack before you enter the plant. Then, often, you have a key card that swipes you into the area you are authorized to be. After that, further security starts to just get in the way of plant operations. Plants can typically trust the people that have physical access to the area.
I'm in this line of work.. The password was not the problem. Even the hacker is thinking like 'corporate IT' would think in terms of security. The plant floor is different.
Here's the rule: A computer that controls industrial machinery should not be connected to the Internet. The only part of an industrial process that can even possibly be connected to the Internet is historical data and alarming.
HMI software is typically a set of screens representing the automation parts of a plant process. This means that in order to start/stop a motor or energize a valve, the screen is required. It is insecure to put a password on that screen. Yes.. insecure. The priorities at a plant are different. It is always the most secure to allow control of the plant to the people at the plant. There are physical E-stop buttons on control panels in case of emergency, but the E-stop is not the end all to prevent industrial disasters. For example, if a person has his hand caught in a valve, hitting the E-stop may cause the valve to move. Another example would be an exothermic process where explosive gases could accumulate in the wrong parts of the process, hitting the E-stop may not get rid of the gas. The operator at the plant is in charge of the process - it is critical that he or she always have control over the system.
Therefore, don't connect your plant floor to the Internet.. unless you want China to be able to control it. If white-collar executive-type people want to see pretty screens, give them historical data.
ISPs either have a monopoly or pseudo monopoly (in practicality) or they have competition. Therefore, there are two types of situations:
1. Monopolistic - Upgrading networks not necessary 2. Market-based - Carriers must upgrade networks to compete or lose customers
In either situation, there are two types of sub-situations:
1. Net-neutral - Carriers must upgrade networks to satisfy bandwidth demand, content decided by individuals 2. Prioritized - Upgrading networks not necessary, low-priority traffic dropped, content decided by corporations
What we have now in most of America is Monopolistic, Net-neutral. Carriers are arguing for Monopolistic, Prioritized. Consumers demand Market-based, Net-neutral. What should we get? Market-based, Either. What will we get most likely? Monopolistic, Prioritized.
The fact we even need a study to prove that the carriers are lying is ridiculous. The best incentive to force ISPs to upgrade their networks is MORE and DIVERSE competition. It is not free-market competition when the only 'normal bandwidth' Internet access at home for a consumer is a choice between either the local cable company or local telco. It is not free-market competition when the only cellular bandwidth is a choice of 1 of 3 major carriers that control hardware and software of the devices and lobby in unison to our government. Carriers are essentially arguing to continue a monopoly and ignore advances in technology that allow unlimited upgrades in bandwidth.
Instead of arguing net neutrality at all, if our lawmakers started making it easier for some competition in the marketplace, ISPs that do not deliver all traffic quickly would die off.
Instead of trusting the guy that originally worked to create the monstrocity, how about we trust the guy that fought against it originally? We had one outspoken guy in government saying we do not need to give up freedoms for temporary safety the day after 9/11.. Rep John Mica says 'I helped create it. It sucks. We should privatize it.' Rep Ron Paul says 'I voted against it. It sucks. We should get rid of it.'
I believe the new cockpit doors did more to combat terrorism than all of the air marshalls and TSA screeners combined.. and the doors did not do much.
HFT does not help the market in any way. It does not promote the investing of capital. Going into and out of a company in less than a second is ridiculous. Steps need to be taken to stop HFT in its tracks before the whole market is ruined.
This will fix HFT:
1. random delay in all trades.. stick a 100ms to 1000ms delay before all trades are posted on the market 2. tax all trades by a miniscule percentage.. give straight to government debt 3. enact a rule that all trades stand.. erroneous trades made by a computer algorithm will never get rolled back
Seriously.. 'I don't know why there is still such craze with high capacity drives for laptops?' That is because you have a myopic view of your single career from your single life experience. You are not a walking market. Why make such sweeping statements?
For my career, I am expected to have virtual machines and various software with me for different scenarios when I am called in emergencies (industrial programming)... No matter how much space my laptop drive has, I keep it filled.
No, I am making the point that the fee is there. At any amount, the 'fee' should not exist. There should be no fee if I trade in the open market beyond the flat-rate brokerage fee. If I throw a 'market order' into the batch, I should get the best price. If I go to a store, and I see a good priced at $10 but I am willing to pay $10.50, I should not have a random middle man running in to buy the good at $10 and sell it to me at $10.50.
Exact mechanism of my delay mechanism? That would be for the exchanges to decide.. But, I would say that every trade has a delay and the delay is a random variation decided by the exchange. That's all. It's not hard to understand. Trade information would need no delay - although it is already delayed by the medium of the actual network communication. Only trades would be delayed. If GoldSacks wants to build their server room across the street from the exchange, their trades would still be delayed like everyone else's.
I don't know how your 'arbitrageurs' would beat the delay because even if they beat the delay, you have random delays based on every other order in the market. Effectively, it would eliminate near-instantaneous trades like 'buy at 10.001, sell at 10.0019'.
HFT ruins the market. That is the point I am making.
Wrong.. machines make decisions based on previous decisions made by humans at the speed limited only by the data transmission. By 'random delay' I am talking about simply a 20-100 ms (that can be tuned accordingly) delay that will simply filter out the advantage a machine will have over human decisions.. A market controlled by machines is worth nothing for humanity.
Whether information is passed at 0ms or 100ms, it will not have an effect on any human decision..
I am not talking about automated trading - I am talking specifically about HFT. A large pension fund manager will be completely unaffected by a random 20 - 100 ms delay while a HFT system would be fucked over.
Second.. trading tax..I would have to believe that a market that imposed the tax would have the ability to enforce it. Otherwise, the entire market system is incompetent.
I believe that Ron Paul's belief would be the Libertarian idea that preservation of free markets should be enforced. HFT only inhibits the free market.. But even further, why does it even need to be government that makes the changes I suggested? Any of the current exchanges are free to make those changes..
God dammit! I'm pissed off again.. I'm pissed off because everyone wants to 'study' HFT or 'discuss' HFT.. and no one seems to understand the big picture! HFT is ruining the fucking stock market. HFT is destroying the opportunities for the middle class.. destroying their retirements.. and ruining the confidence in the market. HFT is making the criminally rich even richer! Everyone likes to talk about HFT and bitch about it - and the people that benefit most from total stupidity that is HFT are the ones that get to enact the policy through lobbying and backroom revolving-door politics.
HFT does one thing... It exploits the gaps in bid and ask price during execution to make money off the actual market orders. But, if the market is no longer correctly offering 'market' prices because of instantly-changing outside influences, how the fuck is it still a market and not a scam? The only people saying HFT is a good thing are the people benefiting from HFT.
There's tons of easy ways to fix the problems created by HFT exploiting.. Here's a few ideas:
1. random delay.. Issue an 'instantaneous' delay in ALL trade execution from all firms. In essence.. make the delay long enough to completely ruin HFT but short enough that no human executing a trade would ever be affected.
2. trading tax.. Tax all trades by a negligible amount. Firms that actually invest will not be affected.
IMO, this article is yet another example of solutions for a problem by exacerbating the problem.. So, fuck you, MIT physicist Alex Wissner-Gross and mathematician Cameron Freer.
I think this 3D fad is one of the most poorly-executed technologies that will end up with an impact like the original laser disc or divx players. First, Avatar has been the only real 3D movie.. and it was awesome. Then, Alice in Wonderland came around and claimed 3D and it looked like a hackjob.
Every part of this '3D' technology is executed badly. 1. The content.. There is a lot of talk about content yet very little available. Where is my ESPN 3D sports channel? Where are all the 3D movies?
2. The home theater.. '3D capable' does not seem to mean shit since even techno-geeks like me don't know what exactly you need to watch 3D. I know the technology requires 120hz+ refresh rates and a 3d-capable player and glasses.. but are all brands interchangeable? If I have a 240hz TV, is that good enough or do I need to blow money a '3D' tv?
3. The glasses.. lol.. Charge me $99/pair? WTF.. Why can't we just use the cheap ones you get in the theatres at home? But seriously.. $99/pair? They're the cheapest plasticky things you can get at the electronics shop and they're $99/each? Freaking joke.. They can't cost more than $3 to make.
The technology looks impressive when watching Avatar at a good theater.. or watching the demos at the Sony store.. But getting that into the home looks like an exercise in frustration even to the most geeky of consumers.
Everyone loves to blame the American consumer.. But how the hell can the American consumer buy American-made any more? computers? clothes? tools? Maybe nobody originally forced the American consumer to buy products made in China.. but the American consumer is sure being forced now.
Some of the blame needs to rest with the American corporations (CEOs) that decided to close up shop in the US only to outsource manufacturing to China while paying themselves ungodly bonuses.
Some of the blame needs to rest with our lawmakers.. selling out America to the likes of NAFTA and the WTO.
Protectionism, when used right, is not bad policy.. The problem with China is they are using protectionism with multiple subversive methods.
Nothing gets the American economy going like a good challenge..
Foreign companies invest in China. Then, China creates a Chinese alternative.. state-run.. state-subsidized.. copying the foreign model. Only.. China manipulates their currency for an export advantage. China keeps their middle class underpaid (while the government hordes money). And safety? Safety costs money.. Harming an American worker is more expensive than keeping him safe.. In China, harm a Chinese worker.. and replace him with one of the horde.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the theatrics are 'part' of the goal - but the real goal is money and social conditioning.
As far as money, as long as the TSA and DHS keep the 'terrorist threats everywhere' narrative alive, Congress will continue to throw taxpayer money at these agencies to waste on worthless unskilled employees (TSA agents) and 'mysterious technological devices' that cost a ton of money. Under this idea, it does not matter whether AIT machines are effective for their actual declared purpose - they are an effective part of the 'social conditioning' goal which is to make the American people believe that the Government has control of the situation.
As far as social conditioning, it has become more obvious that people in control of this country (and the world) will do anything to maintain their control. The TSA serves to undermine and erode individual civil liberties - it is there to make people get used to willingly giving up their rights. Of course the TSA, left unchallenged, will eventually end up in all venues or transportation centers. If the TSA or DHS were not interested in total expansion throughout the US, you would be hearing Janet Napolitano talking more often on the legal limits of the DHS.
And further, this is just my opinion.. This is how I interpret the situation. But, I am posting this with reservations wondering if this will get me put on a 'list' somewhere. I cannot be the only one deathly afraid of the direction of the US Government and completely fearless of any terrorist threat.
I like your solution.. Mine, in previous posts, was to add a random delay (less than a second) to all trades and apply a tax. The tax would be very minute - it would go unnoticed to everyone except the people making a ton of trades.
Actually, I would much prefer the enforcement of copyright law to be on the copyright holder instead of the taxpayer. If we're stuck with silly copyright laws, we might as well avoid paying to enforce it.
I don't even know what Prussian Blue is.. but trying to associate Ron Paul with the extreme outliers in his group of supporters is an error in reasoning. Ron Paul has some screwed up groups that support him; Ron Paul does not support the screwed up groups.
I can't tell if I get more disappointed by seeing tired parrot arguments like these or seeing tired parrot arguments like these get modded insightful. Ron Paul could provide free medical care to a black family, declare his hero to be Martin Luther King, and expose the racism in the drug war and uninformed people would still call him racist because of some implications in newsletters he didn't write.
He actually did those three things.
Failures? You quote a random media rag and declare his entire congressional record a paperweight.. Ron Paul has written books, served in Congress for 12 terms, created a movement, and raised awareness about the erosion of liberty.. but you have a 700-word opinion piece. Clearly, you've done your research.
Judging from the complete corporate-bought shit that most of Congress produces, I could agree with you if your original statement was, "Ron Paul has failed to produce the same pile of shit that the rest of Congress produces."
Wow.. you say this like you know the future of the US is on solid ground. Yet we're knee-deep in a 9/11 reactionary society that mirrors all sci-fi genre's ideas of the worst future for mankind.
I am almost certain the new 'convenience' that we already used to have but lost will be introduced after a company makes millions introducing some newfangled technology that rips off our government (really.. the taxpayers). It works like this:
Step 1: Add major inconvenience due to 'security'
Step 2: Consult with private consultants (read.. former government officials) on how to get rid of new inconvenience and make a ton of money
Step 3: Purchase new unproven technology for all airports with taxpayer dollars and make 'private industry' friends rich
This is how it worked with the backscatter machines and this is how it will work with the new 'laser scanners.'
Maybe I am just playing devil's advocate, but you seem confident in calling Burzynski a quack. But I would assume your only evidence of calling Burzynski a quack is other people calling Burzynski a quack unless you have personal experience with Burzynski.
The fact is that the medical community as a whole has not cured cancer. Yet, the medical community supposedly decides what is the right way and wrong way of treating cancer patients. So outsiders, like Burzynski, face huge uphill battles in order to do anything different. Yet, something different than exists is what is needed to cure cancer.
As far as litigious behavior, let him threaten to sue. Maybe the truth will come out. I am sure if I posted all sorts of criticisms about my doctor that he did not believe were true, he would threaten to sue me too.
The rate of cancer survival in the medical industry is pretty bad ~ shouldn't the entire industry be criticized more?
I don't care if it's "medical" or not. Are his customers (patients) happy with his work? If not, they should be the ones suing and criticizing.
We dealt with the USB key problem at a chemical plant. They got Conficker in one of the distributed systems my company installed. (Rockwell FactoryTalk) Even though our computers were configured with group policies to ignore thumb drives, other infected computers (different systems integrator) infected ours as well. We ended up sending group policies to the rest of the computers on the network and then removing the infection..
Operators had been plugging in their cell phones into the HMI computers to charge.. They got recognized (windows default) as a removeable disk.
So, yes.. there is more than just keeping plant networks off the Internet.. Plants also need to keep skilled IT people around to maintain their control systems just like they keep instrument technicians and electricians. However, most plants I have seen are severely understaffed in the IT arena.
Physical keys are used for the lockout/tagout procedure during maintenance cycles. But, there is usually no reason for physical keys at the operator terminal. Usually, you have to check in at a guard shack before you enter the plant. Then, often, you have a key card that swipes you into the area you are authorized to be. After that, further security starts to just get in the way of plant operations. Plants can typically trust the people that have physical access to the area.
I'm in this line of work.. The password was not the problem. Even the hacker is thinking like 'corporate IT' would think in terms of security. The plant floor is different.
Here's the rule: A computer that controls industrial machinery should not be connected to the Internet. The only part of an industrial process that can even possibly be connected to the Internet is historical data and alarming.
HMI software is typically a set of screens representing the automation parts of a plant process. This means that in order to start/stop a motor or energize a valve, the screen is required. It is insecure to put a password on that screen. Yes.. insecure. The priorities at a plant are different. It is always the most secure to allow control of the plant to the people at the plant. There are physical E-stop buttons on control panels in case of emergency, but the E-stop is not the end all to prevent industrial disasters. For example, if a person has his hand caught in a valve, hitting the E-stop may cause the valve to move. Another example would be an exothermic process where explosive gases could accumulate in the wrong parts of the process, hitting the E-stop may not get rid of the gas. The operator at the plant is in charge of the process - it is critical that he or she always have control over the system.
Therefore, don't connect your plant floor to the Internet.. unless you want China to be able to control it. If white-collar executive-type people want to see pretty screens, give them historical data.
Here's simple logic on 'carriers' or ISPs:
ISPs either have a monopoly or pseudo monopoly (in practicality) or they have competition. Therefore, there are two types of situations:
1. Monopolistic - Upgrading networks not necessary
2. Market-based - Carriers must upgrade networks to compete or lose customers
In either situation, there are two types of sub-situations:
1. Net-neutral - Carriers must upgrade networks to satisfy bandwidth demand, content decided by individuals
2. Prioritized - Upgrading networks not necessary, low-priority traffic dropped, content decided by corporations
What we have now in most of America is Monopolistic, Net-neutral. Carriers are arguing for Monopolistic, Prioritized. Consumers demand Market-based, Net-neutral. What should we get? Market-based, Either. What will we get most likely? Monopolistic, Prioritized.
The fact we even need a study to prove that the carriers are lying is ridiculous. The best incentive to force ISPs to upgrade their networks is MORE and DIVERSE competition. It is not free-market competition when the only 'normal bandwidth' Internet access at home for a consumer is a choice between either the local cable company or local telco. It is not free-market competition when the only cellular bandwidth is a choice of 1 of 3 major carriers that control hardware and software of the devices and lobby in unison to our government. Carriers are essentially arguing to continue a monopoly and ignore advances in technology that allow unlimited upgrades in bandwidth.
Instead of arguing net neutrality at all, if our lawmakers started making it easier for some competition in the marketplace, ISPs that do not deliver all traffic quickly would die off.
Instead of trusting the guy that originally worked to create the monstrocity, how about we trust the guy that fought against it originally? We had one outspoken guy in government saying we do not need to give up freedoms for temporary safety the day after 9/11..
Rep John Mica says 'I helped create it. It sucks. We should privatize it.'
Rep Ron Paul says 'I voted against it. It sucks. We should get rid of it.'
I believe the new cockpit doors did more to combat terrorism than all of the air marshalls and TSA screeners combined.. and the doors did not do much.
HFT does not help the market in any way. It does not promote the investing of capital. Going into and out of a company in less than a second is ridiculous. Steps need to be taken to stop HFT in its tracks before the whole market is ruined.
This will fix HFT:
1. random delay in all trades.. stick a 100ms to 1000ms delay before all trades are posted on the market
2. tax all trades by a miniscule percentage.. give straight to government debt
3. enact a rule that all trades stand.. erroneous trades made by a computer algorithm will never get rolled back
Seriously.. 'I don't know why there is still such craze with high capacity drives for laptops?' That is because you have a myopic view of your single career from your single life experience. You are not a walking market. Why make such sweeping statements?
For my career, I am expected to have virtual machines and various software with me for different scenarios when I am called in emergencies (industrial programming)... No matter how much space my laptop drive has, I keep it filled.
No, I am making the point that the fee is there. At any amount, the 'fee' should not exist. There should be no fee if I trade in the open market beyond the flat-rate brokerage fee. If I throw a 'market order' into the batch, I should get the best price. If I go to a store, and I see a good priced at $10 but I am willing to pay $10.50, I should not have a random middle man running in to buy the good at $10 and sell it to me at $10.50.
Exact mechanism of my delay mechanism? That would be for the exchanges to decide.. But, I would say that every trade has a delay and the delay is a random variation decided by the exchange. That's all. It's not hard to understand. Trade information would need no delay - although it is already delayed by the medium of the actual network communication. Only trades would be delayed. If GoldSacks wants to build their server room across the street from the exchange, their trades would still be delayed like everyone else's.
I don't know how your 'arbitrageurs' would beat the delay because even if they beat the delay, you have random delays based on every other order in the market. Effectively, it would eliminate near-instantaneous trades like 'buy at 10.001, sell at 10.0019'.
HFT ruins the market. That is the point I am making.
Wrong.. machines make decisions based on previous decisions made by humans at the speed limited only by the data transmission. By 'random delay' I am talking about simply a 20-100 ms (that can be tuned accordingly) delay that will simply filter out the advantage a machine will have over human decisions.. A market controlled by machines is worth nothing for humanity.
Whether information is passed at 0ms or 100ms, it will not have an effect on any human decision..
I am not talking about automated trading - I am talking specifically about HFT. A large pension fund manager will be completely unaffected by a random 20 - 100 ms delay while a HFT system would be fucked over.
Second.. trading tax..I would have to believe that a market that imposed the tax would have the ability to enforce it. Otherwise, the entire market system is incompetent.
I fail? {Insert random insult}
I believe that Ron Paul's belief would be the Libertarian idea that preservation of free markets should be enforced. HFT only inhibits the free market.. But even further, why does it even need to be government that makes the changes I suggested? Any of the current exchanges are free to make those changes..
God dammit! I'm pissed off again.. I'm pissed off because everyone wants to 'study' HFT or 'discuss' HFT.. and no one seems to understand the big picture! HFT is ruining the fucking stock market. HFT is destroying the opportunities for the middle class.. destroying their retirements.. and ruining the confidence in the market. HFT is making the criminally rich even richer! Everyone likes to talk about HFT and bitch about it - and the people that benefit most from total stupidity that is HFT are the ones that get to enact the policy through lobbying and backroom revolving-door politics.
HFT does one thing... It exploits the gaps in bid and ask price during execution to make money off the actual market orders. But, if the market is no longer correctly offering 'market' prices because of instantly-changing outside influences, how the fuck is it still a market and not a scam? The only people saying HFT is a good thing are the people benefiting from HFT.
There's tons of easy ways to fix the problems created by HFT exploiting.. Here's a few ideas:
1. random delay.. Issue an 'instantaneous' delay in ALL trade execution from all firms. In essence.. make the delay long enough to completely ruin HFT but short enough that no human executing a trade would ever be affected.
2. trading tax.. Tax all trades by a negligible amount. Firms that actually invest will not be affected.
IMO, this article is yet another example of solutions for a problem by exacerbating the problem.. So, fuck you, MIT physicist Alex Wissner-Gross and mathematician Cameron Freer.
I think this 3D fad is one of the most poorly-executed technologies that will end up with an impact like the original laser disc or divx players. First, Avatar has been the only real 3D movie.. and it was awesome. Then, Alice in Wonderland came around and claimed 3D and it looked like a hackjob.
Every part of this '3D' technology is executed badly.
1. The content.. There is a lot of talk about content yet very little available. Where is my ESPN 3D sports channel? Where are all the 3D movies?
2. The home theater.. '3D capable' does not seem to mean shit since even techno-geeks like me don't know what exactly you need to watch 3D. I know the technology requires 120hz+ refresh rates and a 3d-capable player and glasses.. but are all brands interchangeable? If I have a 240hz TV, is that good enough or do I need to blow money a '3D' tv?
3. The glasses.. lol.. Charge me $99/pair? WTF.. Why can't we just use the cheap ones you get in the theatres at home? But seriously.. $99/pair? They're the cheapest plasticky things you can get at the electronics shop and they're $99/each? Freaking joke.. They can't cost more than $3 to make.
The technology looks impressive when watching Avatar at a good theater.. or watching the demos at the Sony store.. But getting that into the home looks like an exercise in frustration even to the most geeky of consumers.
Everyone loves to blame the American consumer.. But how the hell can the American consumer buy American-made any more? computers? clothes? tools? Maybe nobody originally forced the American consumer to buy products made in China.. but the American consumer is sure being forced now.
Some of the blame needs to rest with the American corporations (CEOs) that decided to close up shop in the US only to outsource manufacturing to China while paying themselves ungodly bonuses.
Some of the blame needs to rest with our lawmakers.. selling out America to the likes of NAFTA and the WTO.
Protectionism, when used right, is not bad policy.. The problem with China is they are using protectionism with multiple subversive methods.
Nothing gets the American economy going like a good challenge..
Foreign companies invest in China. Then, China creates a Chinese alternative.. state-run.. state-subsidized.. copying the foreign model. Only.. China manipulates their currency for an export advantage. China keeps their middle class underpaid (while the government hordes money). And safety? Safety costs money.. Harming an American worker is more expensive than keeping him safe.. In China, harm a Chinese worker.. and replace him with one of the horde.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U-LLsODnuHI
As American consumers, we pay less for cheap plastic crap now.. at the expense of our jobs and quality..
And Walmart leads the way.. fastest from store shelves to landfills.