All retail brokers for the forex market offer these services now, it's not just one site. Stocks are a different story.
The most popular client platform is MetaTrader, and every broker has their own customized version which connects to their servers. There is an entire C-based language used to program your experts (they call them expert advisors) and you can indeed open multiple demo accounts at no cost. And the capabilities are so great you can easily download scripts that parse news events released real-time on websites and react accordingly with no input from you.
Isn't it amazing what Turing machines can do? Word of warning though: you will never get rich on an black-box like an algorithm. Use the technology, but don't get carried away.
What he says is almost correct, with bad terminology. Speculators were allowed into the currency markets to give liquidity to the big boys who need to exchange goods and services across financial borders. GP is wrong to think that all fail, however. Please see links I posted below, very informative stuff.
Regards, The FBI I know. Central banks will often have taps on the activities of major players (investment hourses), so that they can have a measure of control. Very exciting currency fights happen at times. Extremely successful traders will be "shadowed" by their brokers and I don't know how far the intelligence thingie goes, but currencies ARE a matter of national security.
Those interested in the volatility (and thus profitability of "glitches") of the forex markets should check this excellent article on the structuring of the currency markets.
Glitches aside, forex is a great place for smart geeks to make (and lose!) money on the side. All you need now is an internet connection and a mini bank account, whereas 10 years ago this was the exclusive arena of millionaire hedge fund managers. Warning: addiction very probable. Try at your own risk.
Capitalizing on real software glitches is something that happens frequently on more volatile markets like the foreign exchange (fully automated since for retail brokers since 2000). Once the cat gets out of the bag however, the immense loss of the brokers (who usually automatically place orders opposite the sheeple, who are expected to lose on average) causes an alert. Nobody can fool the money markets on things like this for too long.
On the other side, automated trading means that brokers can engage in dirty practices like sending incorrect data to a particular client connection to trigger a trade (they call this stop hunting). Again, this is found out when clients compare data streams from more than 1 broker.
Dangerous stuff. If you are good, try to stay invisible.
As much as I loathe DRM - as you say, begging permission to use what I've already paid for - it should be the creator's choice to control the terms for their own works' distribution for a limited time. But that's what DRM tries to do, except that it attempts to force you into it. Why should the author get to determine what non-commercial activity I do with the media once I've bought it, for any length of time whatsoever?
I believe in rewarding someone for the fruits of their labor Great, so do I, which is why we should buy quality products as originals. Preventing people from giving us their used goods for free however, is not part of this logic. You cannot, and should not try to, monopolize information.
Copyright infringement is not theft I actually think it is. Taking someone else's science/music/software/literature and labeling it as your own *is* theft, because you are robbing someone of the recognition they deserve for producing the "information". But not everything that falls under the umbrella of copyright infringement today is in fact infringement at all. There are some imaginary rights that some people have given themselves and which, in the current immature legal state of things, are as such recognized. We should not bend over; we should fight back as we have done, and as we will always do.
I was not trolling for a response, I was making what I believe to be valid points while having a laugh with the poster (all of whose posts supporting censorship have been modded up). Indian chauvinists running slashdot?
There is no way a sane human being can be *for* censoring the very justified comments people make about cow worshipping, caste systems..etc, yet at the same time claim to be basing that support on the desire to make media objective. If you have a gripe with the news outlets - all news outlets - then that is your problem. When they all agree across the political spectrum, they usually have a point. Otherwise, please explain why all our free media wants to "pander" to Islamic fundamentalism and Communism.
The RSS was basically founded as a social service organization for the emancipation and protection of poor Hindus during the 1940's I could say a lot of funny things here about the consequences of caste racism and Really Simple Syndication , but I won't.
and trying to provide a unified political emancipation movement for Hindus in a rising climate of hostility against them, much like Irish Nationalism or Zionism in Israel. Oooh, you've made yourself awfully popular now, justified the nationalist BS completely there. Religiously inspired racist/uber nationalist movements and organisations are not a nice thing, FYI. The ADL and the Jewish defense league are 2 of the most hated, intrusive, and censorship-happy lobbyists on Capitol Hill. Pictures of holocaust victims are great. Video footage of Israeli military/settlers committing vicious crimes = anti-semitism.
However, because this would endanger the power base upper-caste dominated left wing government and polity in India and their Islamist votebank, Upper-caste...left wing....Islamist...BOOM, my brain asplode. Upper-caste/elites are supposed to be rich right-wing types, you clown. And they don't like "fundamentalist Islamists" very much because much love is lost in extremist relations. Also you're using the "Islamist" word too much, it's starting to sound like a fear-mongering GWB routine. Not good. And the present Chief of Justice is an untouchable (though not under current law).
I have no choice but to speak out, even though, on leftist-dominated slashdot, that makes me a "Filthy Hindu animal" worthy only to be a hateful object. Your other choice is to shut up, or we will censor you for hinting that our holy cows are filthy, you insensitive clod! If we wanted to insult you we would call you a Dalit(untouchable). And I am conservative-ish and republican, like many others here.
... and authors should only be paid for the time they are actually writing, researching, or otherwise working on a book, not for each copy they sell. Well done, you've brought the conversation to the point that thousands of geeks have encountered before, for years on end now, when discussing the relationship of software and digital media to products that (in contrast) derive at least part of their usefulness from their tangible nature. Notice that as soon as you switch into the e-book discussion, things start looking hazy again. Why?
The problem is that with information (which is what digitally stored media is) the price being proposed and paid each time is almost solely for the information itself, which is replicated effortlessly and even communicated in other forms...sung in hymns or scribbled as strings of 1s and 0s on bits of toilet paper.
Tangible products will never have a problem unless organized crime actively pirates hardware (books..etc). Information however, wants to be free. In fact, we never pay for the media, but for the PERMISSION of the seller/original creator to obtain the information on the media, and people get really really tired of asking for permission to use something they have already bought.
DRM and other MAFIAA nonsense attempt to render information as "physical" by hampering replication, but due to the very nature of information, that is impossible. Because of their efforts in restricting our rights as consumers, we are entitled to fighting them by refusing their authority completely.
If you are an artist, I suggest that you stop trying to make your money on information. If you are reasonable and provide your music at decent prices with no restrictions, people will not risk virus ridden undergrounds and instead come to your sources. Still, your real money will be made in the tangible service/good that you can provide, which is your live performance.
Software is a similar but more complex issue not fit for this discussion.
Bit far off, no? They just managed to use chemical compounds to control neuron firing patters on some isolated cells. [typical slashdot skepticism coming] They probably can't even control the patterns they imprinted.
Also, how the hell can you connect the camera to the "wetware" inside the brain(Zonk's word, never heard the term wetware before)? Wireless power? Ouch.
On a sidenote:they say they used "picrotoxin". It has the "toxin" in it. Is that a nice thing?
Well, now you are being skeptical of our skepticism.. it's a wonderful little world we live in:)
Actually things aren't that bad. Yes people can find violate your privacy with enough time and money spent, but the action remains illegal (unless you are GWB). And in a village, "everyone" may know about your row with your wife, but they don't have to know that you have a 57% of developing brain tumors unless you decide to tell them. You must revise your definition of "everything", IMHO.
If you could put blocks on your gametes to make sure only the chromosomes you wanted to combine would combine; would you? I wouldn't do that for the simple reason that I would not be comfortable with it, but this is an irrelevant question. We are talking about stopping a baby from being born due to access to this information.
It's not about resistance to the discovery, it's about the privacy that is being eroded daily, now concerning detailed information that we may not know about ourselves, and which concerns nobody else. Everybody loves science, but you do not have to love all the consequences of the application of science in the free market any more than you have to love the proprietary nature of some (rare) good MS software.
Skepticism and ice cream: where would we be without them?
Terminating the birth of a baby. particularly in advanced stages of pregnancy, is a very controversial issue (Duh!). Terminating the birth of a baby because his/her hair color is little on the blonde side of things, is quite frankly disgusting. If I ever knew someone who did that with the stated reason I would never talk to them again. The world is still arguing over unconditional abortions (no reason) constitute murder in sufficiently developed fetuses, so bringing something literally insulting like this to the table is just flamebait.
I am generally pro-choice and not interested in starting a debate on abortion here, it's friday for Gates' sake. Your post however, was very provocative.
I find your rendering of the term "analyst" to be quite remarkable. I never before realized there was an "anal" in analyst! This proves that the anal.yst's main mode of operation is to excrete in your brain, and to get paid for it. You are a genius.
These "disaster avoided" stories are numbingly boring. Wake me up when money actually gets transferred and there are dead dogs and crying executives in the streets. This is America, people, home of the kiss-kiss-bang-bang, for crying out loud. Please gauge your notion of "news" accordingly.
PS: Just curious: how would it be possible to transfer 450mil out of a bank and go undetected? How are these big things pulled off?
Every single planet we've ever found life on so far has also evolved intelligent life. And how many planets is that? Is it also a coincidence that we are unable to engineer a single primitive life form with thousands of years of engineering (and about 30 years of nano-tech) behind us?
Initial construction of reproducing cells from raw chemicals is more difficult than millions of years of mutation-selection leading to intelligent life.
If altruism is a natural inborn human quality, just like language, then perhaps a 'superior being' should abandon language as well? Abandoning language would adversely affect the human subject concerned, therefore he is naturally inclined to oppose such a move to ensure his own survival. Also, the superiority of human mental capacity is mainly in the abstraction/symbolism/documentation processes which are facilitated by language.
Abandoning altruism can be seen in a slightly different light, because your control of your own emotions enables you to forgo an act that supposedly evolved in you for better group survival in econo-political situations different from those we live in today.
And even if that last paragraph is not a convincing reason, you still cannot say that the individual who decides to let go of these evolved feelings for his own good, is somehow logically "wrong". He is bettering his own survival chances rather than those of others, without actively seeking to harm those others. You may feel bad about that person, naturally, but your feelings are similarly evolved, and for the same reasons.
Atheism is not pretty.
Re:Changes over time?
on
MacGyver Physics
·
· Score: 0, Offtopic
Having faith in the lack of editing on slashdot is one assumption which we will never have to reconfirm. Zonkism beats the scientific method, everyday.
The human mind is not irrational. It is however, capable of accepting irrationality in favor of emotional satisfaction of the ego..etc. That is why people have arguments. Good scientists do not have "heated" debates, because emotion is understood and recognized as irrelevant. They talk only in heated mathematics. If what you say is true, then it is either provably true under axiomatic premises or it is not. In the first case there is no room for argument; in the second we need to go back and know more, and all parties must thus agree. In some cases, our uncertainty is itself provable, and nothing changes in the model of scientific discourse.
Religious arguments cannot fall under this category - a concrete answer would defeat the purpose of most doctrines. It would not make sense for a God to prove himself with mathematical certainty, lots of philosophical problems arise..etc. What you have instead is a matter of possibilities. Weighed chances. Instincts. This is not irrational discourse, in fact it's the only way that it can be done. You can choose not to be part of this discourse (like me!) or you can go on and on, down dark paths in which rationality and the lack of it become intertwined.
"Indeed the Human was of most things willing to argue" - Holy Quraan.
You are definitely right, and it's not just because what happend over the last 24 years of your engineering history is likely to carry over..it's also the nature of the language itself. There is a reason C (and C++) are so damn popular, and the reason is that they embody most, if not all, of what can be done with a general purpose language. Things like Java and Python will stay for quite a while too, because the design there is more conforming to object-orientation while keeping most of the general-pupose flexibility, but C and the various assembly languages will never die. It would require a re-write of the entire architectural basis of computing to throw them out, and the theoretical part of computation theory does not need features that are unavailable here (yet). Anything that can be done in any language can be done (albeit less elegantly) with the aforesaid.
No one shall expel us from the Paradise that Richie has created (Apologies to David Hilbert)
Slashdot Mirror
All retail brokers for the forex market offer these services now, it's not just one site. Stocks are a different story.
The most popular client platform is MetaTrader, and every broker has their own customized version which connects to their servers. There is an entire C-based language used to program your experts (they call them expert advisors) and you can indeed open multiple demo accounts at no cost. And the capabilities are so great you can easily download scripts that parse news events released real-time on websites and react accordingly with no input from you.
Isn't it amazing what Turing machines can do? Word of warning though: you will never get rich on an black-box like an algorithm. Use the technology, but don't get carried away.
What he says is almost correct, with bad terminology. Speculators were allowed into the currency markets to give liquidity to the big boys who need to exchange goods and services across financial borders. GP is wrong to think that all fail, however. Please see links I posted below, very informative stuff.
Regards,
The FBI I know. Central banks will often have taps on the activities of major players (investment hourses), so that they can have a measure of control. Very exciting currency fights happen at times. Extremely successful traders will be "shadowed" by their brokers and I don't know how far the intelligence thingie goes, but currencies ARE a matter of national security.
Say hi to Tom!
Regards,
-P
Those interested in the volatility (and thus profitability of "glitches") of the forex markets should check this excellent article on the structuring of the currency markets.
http://www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=7484
Glitches aside, forex is a great place for smart geeks to make (and lose!) money on the side. All you need now is an internet connection and a mini bank account, whereas 10 years ago this was the exclusive arena of millionaire hedge fund managers. Warning: addiction very probable. Try at your own risk.
Capitalizing on real software glitches is something that happens frequently on more volatile markets like the foreign exchange (fully automated since for retail brokers since 2000). Once the cat gets out of the bag however, the immense loss of the brokers (who usually automatically place orders opposite the sheeple, who are expected to lose on average) causes an alert. Nobody can fool the money markets on things like this for too long.
On the other side, automated trading means that brokers can engage in dirty practices like sending incorrect data to a particular client connection to trigger a trade (they call this stop hunting). Again, this is found out when clients compare data streams from more than 1 broker.
Dangerous stuff. If you are good, try to stay invisible.
I was not trolling for a response, I was making what I believe to be valid points while having a laugh with the poster (all of whose posts supporting censorship have been modded up). Indian chauvinists running slashdot?
There is no way a sane human being can be *for* censoring the very justified comments people make about cow worshipping, caste systems..etc, yet at the same time claim to be basing that support on the desire to make media objective. If you have a gripe with the news outlets - all news outlets - then that is your problem. When they all agree across the political spectrum, they usually have a point. Otherwise, please explain why all our free media wants to "pander" to Islamic fundamentalism and Communism. The RSS was basically founded as a social service organization for the emancipation and protection of poor Hindus during the 1940's I could say a lot of funny things here about the consequences of caste racism and Really Simple Syndication , but I won't. and trying to provide a unified political emancipation movement for Hindus in a rising climate of hostility against them, much like Irish Nationalism or Zionism in Israel. Oooh, you've made yourself awfully popular now, justified the nationalist BS completely there. Religiously inspired racist/uber nationalist movements and organisations are not a nice thing, FYI. The ADL and the Jewish defense league are 2 of the most hated, intrusive, and censorship-happy lobbyists on Capitol Hill. Pictures of holocaust victims are great. Video footage of Israeli military/settlers committing vicious crimes = anti-semitism. However, because this would endanger the power base upper-caste dominated left wing government and polity in India and their Islamist votebank, Upper-caste...left wing....Islamist
... and authors should only be paid for the time they are actually writing, researching, or otherwise working on a book, not for each copy they sell. Well done, you've brought the conversation to the point that thousands of geeks have encountered before, for years on end now, when discussing the relationship of software and digital media to products that (in contrast) derive at least part of their usefulness from their tangible nature. Notice that as soon as you switch into the e-book discussion, things start looking hazy again. Why?The problem is that with information (which is what digitally stored media is) the price being proposed and paid each time is almost solely for the information itself, which is replicated effortlessly and even communicated in other forms...sung in hymns or scribbled as strings of 1s and 0s on bits of toilet paper.
Tangible products will never have a problem unless organized crime actively pirates hardware (books..etc). Information however, wants to be free. In fact, we never pay for the media, but for the PERMISSION of the seller/original creator to obtain the information on the media, and people get really really tired of asking for permission to use something they have already bought.
DRM and other MAFIAA nonsense attempt to render information as "physical" by hampering replication, but due to the very nature of information, that is impossible. Because of their efforts in restricting our rights as consumers, we are entitled to fighting them by refusing their authority completely.
If you are an artist, I suggest that you stop trying to make your money on information. If you are reasonable and provide your music at decent prices with no restrictions, people will not risk virus ridden undergrounds and instead come to your sources. Still, your real money will be made in the tangible service/good that you can provide, which is your live performance.
Software is a similar but more complex issue not fit for this discussion.
Bit far off, no? They just managed to use chemical compounds to control neuron firing patters on some isolated cells. [typical slashdot skepticism coming] They probably can't even control the patterns they imprinted.
Also, how the hell can you connect the camera to the "wetware" inside the brain(Zonk's word, never heard the term wetware before)? Wireless power? Ouch.
On a sidenote:they say they used "picrotoxin". It has the "toxin" in it. Is that a nice thing?
Well, now you are being skeptical of our skepticism.. it's a wonderful little world we live in :)
Actually things aren't that bad. Yes people can find violate your privacy with enough time and money spent, but the action remains illegal (unless you are GWB). And in a village, "everyone" may know about your row with your wife, but they don't have to know that you have a 57% of developing brain tumors unless you decide to tell them. You must revise your definition of "everything", IMHO.
It's not about resistance to the discovery, it's about the privacy that is being eroded daily, now concerning detailed information that we may not know about ourselves, and which concerns nobody else. Everybody loves science, but you do not have to love all the consequences of the application of science in the free market any more than you have to love the proprietary nature of some (rare) good MS software.
Skepticism and ice cream: where would we be without them?
Uh..error detected, this was a reply to the Anonymous Coward below, I replied to the wrong post. It's been a long week.
Terminating the birth of a baby. particularly in advanced stages of pregnancy, is a very controversial issue (Duh!). Terminating the birth of a baby because his/her hair color is little on the blonde side of things, is quite frankly disgusting. If I ever knew someone who did that with the stated reason I would never talk to them again. The world is still arguing over unconditional abortions (no reason) constitute murder in sufficiently developed fetuses, so bringing something literally insulting like this to the table is just flamebait.
I am generally pro-choice and not interested in starting a debate on abortion here, it's friday for Gates' sake. Your post however, was very provocative.
I find your rendering of the term "analyst" to be quite remarkable. I never before realized there was an "anal" in analyst! This proves that the anal.yst's main mode of operation is to excrete in your brain, and to get paid for it. You are a genius.
Mountain climbers fall suddenly off dangerous slope, traditional equipment fail, spiderman web used in last second and lives saved.
Large fire in the city, building collapsing, people inside, spiderman web used to clear obstacles inside without getting close. Lives saved.
Priorities are great, but human diseases are not everything.
These "disaster avoided" stories are numbingly boring. Wake me up when money actually gets transferred and there are dead dogs and crying executives in the streets. This is America, people, home of the kiss-kiss-bang-bang, for crying out loud. Please gauge your notion of "news" accordingly.
PS: Just curious: how would it be possible to transfer 450mil out of a bank and go undetected? How are these big things pulled off?
Initial construction of reproducing cells from raw chemicals is more difficult than millions of years of mutation-selection leading to intelligent life.
Abandoning altruism can be seen in a slightly different light, because your control of your own emotions enables you to forgo an act that supposedly evolved in you for better group survival in econo-political situations different from those we live in today.
And even if that last paragraph is not a convincing reason, you still cannot say that the individual who decides to let go of these evolved feelings for his own good, is somehow logically "wrong". He is bettering his own survival chances rather than those of others, without actively seeking to harm those others. You may feel bad about that person, naturally, but your feelings are similarly evolved, and for the same reasons.
Atheism is not pretty.
Having faith in the lack of editing on slashdot is one assumption which we will never have to reconfirm. Zonkism beats the scientific method, everyday.
The human mind is not irrational. It is however, capable of accepting irrationality in favor of emotional satisfaction of the ego..etc. That is why people have arguments. Good scientists do not have "heated" debates, because emotion is understood and recognized as irrelevant. They talk only in heated mathematics. If what you say is true, then it is either provably true under axiomatic premises or it is not. In the first case there is no room for argument; in the second we need to go back and know more, and all parties must thus agree. In some cases, our uncertainty is itself provable, and nothing changes in the model of scientific discourse.
Religious arguments cannot fall under this category - a concrete answer would defeat the purpose of most doctrines. It would not make sense for a God to prove himself with mathematical certainty, lots of philosophical problems arise..etc. What you have instead is a matter of possibilities. Weighed chances. Instincts. This is not irrational discourse, in fact it's the only way that it can be done. You can choose not to be part of this discourse (like me!) or you can go on and on, down dark paths in which rationality and the lack of it become intertwined.
"Indeed the Human was of most things willing to argue" - Holy Quraan.
Sanitize.
You are definitely right, and it's not just because what happend over the last 24 years of your engineering history is likely to carry over..it's also the nature of the language itself. There is a reason C (and C++) are so damn popular, and the reason is that they embody most, if not all, of what can be done with a general purpose language. Things like Java and Python will stay for quite a while too, because the design there is more conforming to object-orientation while keeping most of the general-pupose flexibility, but C and the various assembly languages will never die. It would require a re-write of the entire architectural basis of computing to throw them out, and the theoretical part of computation theory does not need features that are unavailable here (yet). Anything that can be done in any language can be done (albeit less elegantly) with the aforesaid.
No one shall expel us from the Paradise that Richie has created (Apologies to David Hilbert)