>It seems you may be working under an incorrect (though very common on HN) assumption...[markets are for liquidity, not allocation] My assumption is that the

>It seems you may be working under an incorrect (though very common on HN) assumption...[markets are for liquidity, not allocation] My assumption is that the existence of HFT hurts the market as a whole, and hurts the economy as a whole; it is, essentially, a systematic hack that allows smart programmers to get money for nothing other than being smart enough to game the system. That is one assumption that could (should!) be challenged. Batch auctions (thanks for the term!) quantize trades in time, eliminating HFT. The other being that quantized trading, even if implemented, would not actually eliminate HFT. This could also be challenged. But my inexpert confusing of liquidity and allocation is a bit of a red-herring.