If I were an average investor I'd just hold onto the stock for the hour (day, week) it took to go back up to it's actual value. I might also buy while the stock was artificially low.
"NYSE stuck them with every single trade that they transacted during the particular time span."
"Trades executed at 30 percent higher or lower than the opening price will be canceled"
Those statements (yours and the NYSE's) seem to be contrary, unless you're relying on "during the particular time span" as weasel words. I'm not saying you are, but can you clarify?
"So out of the top 10 worst days of the market only one has happened since the advent of HFT."
That's misleading. You have to annualize the risk of a large drop. You can't say there was only one big drop since 2008 (four years) and nine big drops from 1900 to 2008 (108 years), therefore HFT stabilizes the market.
That all sounds very good, until you realize that the HFT is just playing the part of a middleman, adding, well, no value to the exchange. Without the HFT the buyer and the seller would just talk to each other, negotiate a price, and the seller would get more for his stock while the buyer paid less. The only one who loses is the HFT, who is revealed as being superfluous. Middlemen used to be necessary. They're not anymore.
Transaction costs HAVE come down. It's hard to tell how much of that is due to HFTs, and how much is simply due to improving technology. It used to cost me $0.50 to pay my utilities bills and now it costs me zero. Actual transaction costs would have come down anyway, but it's possible the popularity of HFT helped push the offered price down faster than otherwise.
I also don't really think there's anything wrong with HFT, per se. If you do it and mess up, too bad. There is a problem though - when HFTs screw up, they screw up big, and the exchanges, governments, etc. seem to think they should be bailed out or have bad trades cancelled (which happened in this case). That gives HFT an artificial advantage, encouraging more people to do it (or give their money to companies that do it).
Personally, because people are people, I think a one to ten second delay on trades would be an excellent idea. It would level the playing field as well - someone with an office on Wall street wouldn't have an advantage over someone elsewhere anymore.
And they'll keep her blood on ice for the next eight years and test it again and again and again.
If she's cheating she'll get caught, just like lots of other athletes from lots of other countries have been. In the meantime, speculative accusations have no point.
Solar plants ARE being built, along with other renewable plants. I don't think the barriers are purely economic anymore. Rather, they involve the risk of being among the first, and, ironically, environmental challenges. Corporate boards are much more comfortable with "we can build another of these, just like the last thousand, with return of X" as opposed to "we can build one of these, which have worked once or twice, for a return of X, probably."
"that there is no possible "hidden state" that would account for the fact that the two measurements can be taken in arbitrary directions and still correlate."
Not quite. Bell's theorem, and the experiments inspired by it, suggest that any classical theory (or hidden variable theory) would have to be non-local. The non-locality can be quite mild though.
Also, both the results of the experiments that show Bell's inequality is violated, and the theorem itself, are being challenged.
Or use something better than 15%. Solar thermal is more like 50%, which brings your area down to less than 7%. And as you point out, 200,000 GW is ridiculously over the top.
The average solar insolation is quite a bit better than that. Solar thermal is more efficient than your standard hardware store PV panel, and various strategies like molten salt storage work quite well.
You're only considering solar panels on individuals' houses. We don't all use diesel generators all the time, so why would solar have to be locally installed?
Actually, unless I messed up the math, this study is saying that the solar technology we have right now could be deployed to easily generate that much power, in the US alone.
No, it doesn't. So long as the solar panels pay for themselves, they're viable. It may not be viable for an individual to put them on his roof (mostly because they are undervalued in the market, if what you say is true) but that has nothing to do with whether you can go and build solar power plants to replace coal, nuclear, gas and oil.
Just because one specific type of solar installation might not be perfect (for you) doesn't mean solar itself won't work.
I find it very odd that you build a lament about a capitalistic dystopia around a trial where both the plaintiff and the defendant are gigantic, capitalistic corporations.
The trial in Germany, at least, was not really about design patents. It was a trade dress suit, and the purpose of the trial was to determine whether a) Samsung copied Apple and b) whether Samsung copied Apple sufficiently well that their products could be mistaken for Apple's.
Hm. Judging by the craziness that seems to happen, it might be a good idea to have some representatives who don't respond to every whim of the people in charge. A little sanity filter. On the other hand, that would require the representatives to be saner than the mob.
That was my thought, then I realized that the graph is showing a little bit lower than normal temperatures along the coasts. Something more complicated must be going on.
By reading personal email at work I mean I can access my mail via the web instead of having my personal desktop computer with me.
I have an e-mail client that checks my personal e-mail on my work desktop.
Smartphone doens't help since now I have mail differences between the smartphone and my computer.
I check my mail on my notebook, work desktop, iPad and iPhone. They all stay nicely in sync.
Ssh doesn't work if my home computer is shut off, does not have a fixed IP address, etc.
Leave it turned on and use dynamic DNS. Better yet, ssh into your mail provider's server.
POP is the only thing my ISP allows
Oh. THAT's your real problem - it all goes back to your ISP using broken e-mail. I admit, I haven't used ISP email in more than a decade. You can get an IMAP account for cheap from lots of places. For less than $10/month I've got a couple gigs of web space, IMAP e-mail, ssh access to the server and a domain name (and thus an e-mail address that won't change as long as I can afford it). Apple will give you one for free, although it's possible they're reading your e-mail. Google will give you one for free, but they're definitely reading your e-mail. Another option, and the ultimate for the paranoid, is to get dynamic DNS on your home computer and roll your own.
Although, by leaving messages on the server you can do reasonably well even with POP on a decent smartphone.
Slashdot Mirror
"Remember when the income tax was 7%"
Remember when most people didn't have sewer service and the US didn't spend more on its military than the rest of the world combined?
If I were an average investor I'd just hold onto the stock for the hour (day, week) it took to go back up to it's actual value. I might also buy while the stock was artificially low.
"NYSE stuck them with every single trade that they transacted during the particular time span."
"Trades executed at 30 percent higher or lower than the opening price will be canceled"
Those statements (yours and the NYSE's) seem to be contrary, unless you're relying on "during the particular time span" as weasel words. I'm not saying you are, but can you clarify?
"So out of the top 10 worst days of the market only one has happened since the advent of HFT."
That's misleading. You have to annualize the risk of a large drop. You can't say there was only one big drop since 2008 (four years) and nine big drops from 1900 to 2008 (108 years), therefore HFT stabilizes the market.
That all sounds very good, until you realize that the HFT is just playing the part of a middleman, adding, well, no value to the exchange. Without the HFT the buyer and the seller would just talk to each other, negotiate a price, and the seller would get more for his stock while the buyer paid less. The only one who loses is the HFT, who is revealed as being superfluous. Middlemen used to be necessary. They're not anymore.
Transaction costs HAVE come down. It's hard to tell how much of that is due to HFTs, and how much is simply due to improving technology. It used to cost me $0.50 to pay my utilities bills and now it costs me zero. Actual transaction costs would have come down anyway, but it's possible the popularity of HFT helped push the offered price down faster than otherwise.
I also don't really think there's anything wrong with HFT, per se. If you do it and mess up, too bad. There is a problem though - when HFTs screw up, they screw up big, and the exchanges, governments, etc. seem to think they should be bailed out or have bad trades cancelled (which happened in this case). That gives HFT an artificial advantage, encouraging more people to do it (or give their money to companies that do it).
Personally, because people are people, I think a one to ten second delay on trades would be an excellent idea. It would level the playing field as well - someone with an office on Wall street wouldn't have an advantage over someone elsewhere anymore.
We're social animals.
Ye's time was 4:28.43. The silver was Beisel, at 4:31.27. That's a bit less than a three second difference, or 1.06%.
Usain Bolt ran a 9.69 in 2008. The silver was Richard Tompson, with a 9.89. That's a 2.06% difference.
So Bolt won his race by a greater margin than did Ye.
And they'll keep her blood on ice for the next eight years and test it again and again and again.
If she's cheating she'll get caught, just like lots of other athletes from lots of other countries have been. In the meantime, speculative accusations have no point.
Bell's theorem isn't anything like airtight, contrary to popular belief among people who say things like "LOAL."
Solar plants ARE being built, along with other renewable plants. I don't think the barriers are purely economic anymore. Rather, they involve the risk of being among the first, and, ironically, environmental challenges. Corporate boards are much more comfortable with "we can build another of these, just like the last thousand, with return of X" as opposed to "we can build one of these, which have worked once or twice, for a return of X, probably."
I believe some call it "the profit motive."
"that there is no possible "hidden state" that would account for the fact that the two measurements can be taken in arbitrary directions and still correlate."
Not quite. Bell's theorem, and the experiments inspired by it, suggest that any classical theory (or hidden variable theory) would have to be non-local. The non-locality can be quite mild though.
Also, both the results of the experiments that show Bell's inequality is violated, and the theorem itself, are being challenged.
Or use something better than 15%. Solar thermal is more like 50%, which brings your area down to less than 7%. And as you point out, 200,000 GW is ridiculously over the top.
The average solar insolation is quite a bit better than that. Solar thermal is more efficient than your standard hardware store PV panel, and various strategies like molten salt storage work quite well.
"but what corporation gives a crap about that?"
That's why we have these things called laws. To make them care.
You're only considering solar panels on individuals' houses. We don't all use diesel generators all the time, so why would solar have to be locally installed?
Actually, unless I messed up the math, this study is saying that the solar technology we have right now could be deployed to easily generate that much power, in the US alone.
No, it doesn't. So long as the solar panels pay for themselves, they're viable. It may not be viable for an individual to put them on his roof (mostly because they are undervalued in the market, if what you say is true) but that has nothing to do with whether you can go and build solar power plants to replace coal, nuclear, gas and oil.
Just because one specific type of solar installation might not be perfect (for you) doesn't mean solar itself won't work.
"The only way oil could be better is if I could fuck or eat it!"
RealDoll? Edible oil product?
(yes, I know that last one is not petroleum, but... are you sure?)
I find it very odd that you build a lament about a capitalistic dystopia around a trial where both the plaintiff and the defendant are gigantic, capitalistic corporations.
The trial in Germany, at least, was not really about design patents. It was a trade dress suit, and the purpose of the trial was to determine whether a) Samsung copied Apple and b) whether Samsung copied Apple sufficiently well that their products could be mistaken for Apple's.
Hm. Judging by the craziness that seems to happen, it might be a good idea to have some representatives who don't respond to every whim of the people in charge. A little sanity filter. On the other hand, that would require the representatives to be saner than the mob.
That was my thought, then I realized that the graph is showing a little bit lower than normal temperatures along the coasts. Something more complicated must be going on.
I have an e-mail client that checks my personal e-mail on my work desktop.
I check my mail on my notebook, work desktop, iPad and iPhone. They all stay nicely in sync.
Leave it turned on and use dynamic DNS. Better yet, ssh into your mail provider's server.
Oh. THAT's your real problem - it all goes back to your ISP using broken e-mail. I admit, I haven't used ISP email in more than a decade. You can get an IMAP account for cheap from lots of places. For less than $10/month I've got a couple gigs of web space, IMAP e-mail, ssh access to the server and a domain name (and thus an e-mail address that won't change as long as I can afford it). Apple will give you one for free, although it's possible they're reading your e-mail. Google will give you one for free, but they're definitely reading your e-mail. Another option, and the ultimate for the paranoid, is to get dynamic DNS on your home computer and roll your own.
Although, by leaving messages on the server you can do reasonably well even with POP on a decent smartphone.
My solutions to your problem, in order of my preference (you might have different priorities):
1) get a job where they treat you like an adult
2) smart phone
3) ssh and pine
4) switch ISPs to one that isn't out to maximally monetize you.