6 ms·

Every Lewis book I've read has been great. He does a fantastic job exposing any number of things that are likely desired to be kept secret. Also does a great jo

Every Lewis book I've read has been great. He does a fantastic job exposing any number of things that are likely desired to be kept secret. Also does a great job making things understandable, while not dumbing it down too much to the point of inaccurate. "The Great HFT Debate" is a must-watch, following the release of 'Flashboys' just seeing how defensive the market players got. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcpmHyPD_PY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcpmHyPD_PY

kasey_junk 11y ago
I'm a (or at least was) a huge Michael Lewis fan. Until he wrote a book about the industry I was in (HFT). Regardless of where you stand on HFT, Flashboys does a very bad job explaining the technical aspects that are occurring. Further it presents a completely 1 sided look at the industry, without ever quoting someone knowledgeable about the technical aspects. I don't dislike Flashboys because of its conclusions, I dislike it because of its inaccuracy. It called inot question every other book of his. Which was really disappointing as I had enjoyed them all so much.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- sharkweek 11y ago
  This is super interesting to me - got any resources of people counter-pointing Lewis's writing? Would love to dive in a little deeper.
  - kasey_junk 11y ago
    http://kc.my-junk.info/hft-books/ http://kc.my-junk.info/hft-books/ ^^ a blog post where I collect this stuff as I answer this question so often.
    - toddmatthews 11y ago
      but you don't really give any specific counter points. if Flash Boys is dreadful, i would think you would have specific points to counter it
      - tptacek 11y ago
        If there was a way you could have worded this comment without implying that Kasey was just making things up, it would have been a better comment. As it stands, I think you can take the time to use the search bar at the bottom of the page to find what he's written about the book on the site before.
        toddmatthews 11y ago
        in no way was i implying he was "making things up" but he has said that Flash Boys did a "bad job of explaining HFT" and on that website he links to it says its "dreadful". He also says he "answers this question so often" he made that site. but the site just lists books, but doesn't really answer any questions. Just pointing to other peoples books is not really answering a question. and i think if Flash Boys is "dreadful" he could point to a few concrete examples
      - Nimitz14 11y ago
        https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2014/04/04/michael-lewis-shilling-for-the-buyside/ https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2014/04/04/michael-lewis-... Quote: > I think this is the crux of this story: according to Michael Lewis and Katsuyama, we’re supposed to trust people like Einhorn who have been convicted of insider trading, people who are suspected of insider trading (buy side is by definition rife with this; particularly firms that do merger arb and special events), J.P. Morgan, Goldman and Morgan Stanley: we’re supposed to trust these guys more than we’re supposed to trust a bunch of tiny little market making firms who had been inconveniencing them by taking away some of their flow. Lewis tries to make this seem like a battle between the underdog “good guys” and the evil establishment. To believe this, you’d have to believe that Goldman Sachs and people like Einhorn are underdogs, rather than the actual establishment. To believe this, you’d have to believe the tiny industry of HFT traders actually rules the world and buys off congressmen and the SEC more than … J.P. Morgan and Goldman. [...] Yeah, I might believe that. I might believe that if I were a dribbling retard.
  - airza 11y ago
    This is an excellent and fairly short book on the subject: http://www.amazon.com/Flash-Boys-Insiders-Perspective-High-Frequency-ebook/dp/B00P0QI2M2 http://www.amazon.com/Flash-Boys-Insiders-Perspective-High-F...
L-Logic 11y ago
Agreed, his books are good. People should also watch the movie "The Big Short."
andylei 11y ago
its weird that in every industry where computers replace people, HN considers it progress, but when its making securities markets, its a scam.
- wpietri 11y ago
  Back in the day I worked for financial traders on early automated trading systems, and I think your summary is fantastically poor. First, people have long had questions about the societal effects and costs of trading, even when humans did it. Second, the automation of trading isn't merely replicating what humans do at a lower cost. I'd call it a fundamentally different activity. Third, one of the things that has become more and more attenuated is any sense of moral responsibility. Traders were never known for attacks of the warm fuzzies, but algorithms not only don't give a shit about how the affect humans, they can't. And fourth, instead of saving everybody money, finance eats up an ever-increasing share of the economy, and I think automation is part of that. Automation isn't universally good. Sometimes it makes things better, sometimes worse. As technologists our job isn't just to automate everything. It's to use our professional skills and experience to improve the world, to improve human lives.
  - oldmanjay 11y ago
    How does one eat a share of the economy? Do I have to assume it to be zero sum for the concept to be clear?
    - wpietri 11y ago
      You don't have to assume zero sum in general. Just that some interactions can be zero or negative sum. The simple example is monopoly rents: monopolists can increase their share of total profits without increasing value delivered. By a lot of measures, the financial industry captures a lot more money than they did in previous decades. But it's far from clear that they're delivering a lot more value, and given that computers have drastically reduced their costs, it's reasonable to expect them to be smaller, not larger. As a start, this has some good graphs: http://esoltas.blogspot.com/2013/02/5-more-graphs-on-finance.html http://esoltas.blogspot.com/2013/02/5-more-graphs-on-finance... And here are a couple more general-audience articles: http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/03/30/chart-of-the-day-us-financial-profits/ http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/03/30/chart-of-th... http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/12/10/number-of-the-week-finances-share-of-economy-continues-to-grow/ http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/12/10/number-of-the-week...

kasey_junk 11y ago

I'm a (or at least was) a huge Michael Lewis fan. Until he wrote a book about the industry I was in (HFT). Regardless of where you stand on HFT, Flashboys does a very bad job explaining the technical aspects that are occurring. Further it presents a completely 1 sided look at the industry, without ever quoting someone knowledgeable about the technical aspects. I don't dislike Flashboys because of its conclusions, I dislike it because of its inaccuracy. It called inot question every other book of his. Which was really disappointing as I had enjoyed them all so much.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
sharkweek 11y ago
This is super interesting to me - got any resources of people counter-pointing Lewis's writing? Would love to dive in a little deeper.
- kasey_junk 11y ago
  http://kc.my-junk.info/hft-books/ http://kc.my-junk.info/hft-books/ ^^ a blog post where I collect this stuff as I answer this question so often.
  - toddmatthews 11y ago
    but you don't really give any specific counter points. if Flash Boys is dreadful, i would think you would have specific points to counter it
    - tptacek 11y ago
      If there was a way you could have worded this comment without implying that Kasey was just making things up, it would have been a better comment. As it stands, I think you can take the time to use the search bar at the bottom of the page to find what he's written about the book on the site before.
      - toddmatthews 11y ago
        in no way was i implying he was "making things up" but he has said that Flash Boys did a "bad job of explaining HFT" and on that website he links to it says its "dreadful". He also says he "answers this question so often" he made that site. but the site just lists books, but doesn't really answer any questions. Just pointing to other peoples books is not really answering a question. and i think if Flash Boys is "dreadful" he could point to a few concrete examples
    - Nimitz14 11y ago
      https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2014/04/04/michael-lewis-shilling-for-the-buyside/ https://scottlocklin.wordpress.com/2014/04/04/michael-lewis-... Quote: > I think this is the crux of this story: according to Michael Lewis and Katsuyama, we’re supposed to trust people like Einhorn who have been convicted of insider trading, people who are suspected of insider trading (buy side is by definition rife with this; particularly firms that do merger arb and special events), J.P. Morgan, Goldman and Morgan Stanley: we’re supposed to trust these guys more than we’re supposed to trust a bunch of tiny little market making firms who had been inconveniencing them by taking away some of their flow. Lewis tries to make this seem like a battle between the underdog “good guys” and the evil establishment. To believe this, you’d have to believe that Goldman Sachs and people like Einhorn are underdogs, rather than the actual establishment. To believe this, you’d have to believe the tiny industry of HFT traders actually rules the world and buys off congressmen and the SEC more than … J.P. Morgan and Goldman. [...] Yeah, I might believe that. I might believe that if I were a dribbling retard.
- airza 11y ago
  This is an excellent and fairly short book on the subject: http://www.amazon.com/Flash-Boys-Insiders-Perspective-High-Frequency-ebook/dp/B00P0QI2M2 http://www.amazon.com/Flash-Boys-Insiders-Perspective-High-F...

L-Logic 11y ago

Agreed, his books are good. People should also watch the movie "The Big Short."

andylei 11y ago

its weird that in every industry where computers replace people, HN considers it progress, but when its making securities markets, its a scam.

wpietri 11y ago
Back in the day I worked for financial traders on early automated trading systems, and I think your summary is fantastically poor. First, people have long had questions about the societal effects and costs of trading, even when humans did it. Second, the automation of trading isn't merely replicating what humans do at a lower cost. I'd call it a fundamentally different activity. Third, one of the things that has become more and more attenuated is any sense of moral responsibility. Traders were never known for attacks of the warm fuzzies, but algorithms not only don't give a shit about how the affect humans, they can't. And fourth, instead of saving everybody money, finance eats up an ever-increasing share of the economy, and I think automation is part of that. Automation isn't universally good. Sometimes it makes things better, sometimes worse. As technologists our job isn't just to automate everything. It's to use our professional skills and experience to improve the world, to improve human lives.
- oldmanjay 11y ago
  How does one eat a share of the economy? Do I have to assume it to be zero sum for the concept to be clear?
  - wpietri 11y ago
    You don't have to assume zero sum in general. Just that some interactions can be zero or negative sum. The simple example is monopoly rents: monopolists can increase their share of total profits without increasing value delivered. By a lot of measures, the financial industry captures a lot more money than they did in previous decades. But it's far from clear that they're delivering a lot more value, and given that computers have drastically reduced their costs, it's reasonable to expect them to be smaller, not larger. As a start, this has some good graphs: http://esoltas.blogspot.com/2013/02/5-more-graphs-on-finance.html http://esoltas.blogspot.com/2013/02/5-more-graphs-on-finance... And here are a couple more general-audience articles: http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/03/30/chart-of-the-day-us-financial-profits/ http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2011/03/30/chart-of-th... http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/12/10/number-of-the-week-finances-share-of-economy-continues-to-grow/ http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2011/12/10/number-of-the-week...