13 ms·

Like it or not, the SEC regulates the financial markets. That is a primary reason why people trust them with their money. "Who are you to say people should not

Like it or not, the SEC regulates the financial markets. That is a primary reason why people trust them with their money. "Who are you to say people should not focus on what they want?" is fairly dumb. This isn't like stamp collecting. The SEC can quite legitimately rule that: 1) Traders competing to make better trades: serves a purpose. 2) Traders competing to make the same trades, but a microsecond faster: serves no purpose at all.

growse 3y ago
If two traders want to buy 100 widgets at the same price, but there are only 100 for sale at that price, whose trade should 'win' that competition? Which is the 'better' trade?
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  > Which is the 'better' trade? You just said they were the same.
  - growse 3y ago
    > 2) Traders competing to make the same trades, but a microsecond faster: serves no purpose at all. So if time of quote has zero value, then how should the market decide which two orders at same volume and price gets executed?
    - infecto 3y ago
      Just randomly pick it. /s I find these threads are the opposite of Bitcoin threads. It brings out the wild opinions about financial markets.
      - AlbertCory 3y ago
        Good point. "Time" in a computer is not a real number in the mathematical sense. It's quantized. So simply set the quantum unit appropriately and call all trades within that unit "the same time." Then the choice is between N identical trades that come in at the same time. Random seems as good a method as any.
        infecto 3y ago
        That would be a naive solution. This is why I have stated there is no easy solution to these problems. Randomizing it would lead to actors gaming it. How would you randomize it? Random why order? Then I will just place more orders maybe. Random across actors? Then maybe I add more actors to the pool. Instead of stroking your ego talking about time, I hope you realize that the solutions to fair market participation can be challenging and it’s not as easy to just make a blanket statement.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
infecto 3y ago
Sorry not going to stoop at your level of calling your comment dumb but next time you should try to elevate yourself. You are making blanket statements without any substance. I was simply pointing out that it is silly to make blanket statements that people should not be focusing their efforts on financial markets. It is a complex benefit and problem and it demonstrates the lack of education by saying timing is not an important aspect of price discovery. I agree there are probably negative aspects but I think it’s a complicated problem to unravel.
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  "dumb" is making junior-high level statements like "Who are you to say people should not focus on what they want?" That doesn't deserve any more of an "elevated" answer.
  - infecto 3y ago
    Ahh more insults and no evidence. Well done. I don’t know who hurt you or how I said anything to cause such a reaction but please relax. All I am saying is it’s a lot more complex then just saying it’s bad and serves no purpose. I think there is probably a middle ground too but I would not even know how to get there. IEX still serves very little volume so I would say the market is not concerned about the current setup. Would love to know why you think it’s so bad.
    - freshpots 3y ago
      That's their MO. Insults, and playing the victim, with very little contribution to the conversation at hand beyond those two things.
    - AlbertCory 3y ago
      "people should not focus on what they want" is so adolescent that it doesn't require any further dismissal.
      - infecto 3y ago
lost_tourist 3y ago
I agree and it gives an unfair advantage to those who have a lot more money and resources to game the system. A 1 second tick seems plenty fast enough as someone else suggested.

growse 3y ago

If two traders want to buy 100 widgets at the same price, but there are only 100 for sale at that price, whose trade should 'win' that competition? Which is the 'better' trade?

AlbertCory 3y ago
> Which is the 'better' trade? You just said they were the same.
- growse 3y ago
  > 2) Traders competing to make the same trades, but a microsecond faster: serves no purpose at all. So if time of quote has zero value, then how should the market decide which two orders at same volume and price gets executed?
  - infecto 3y ago
    Just randomly pick it. /s I find these threads are the opposite of Bitcoin threads. It brings out the wild opinions about financial markets.
    - AlbertCory 3y ago
      Good point. "Time" in a computer is not a real number in the mathematical sense. It's quantized. So simply set the quantum unit appropriately and call all trades within that unit "the same time." Then the choice is between N identical trades that come in at the same time. Random seems as good a method as any.
      - infecto 3y ago
        That would be a naive solution. This is why I have stated there is no easy solution to these problems. Randomizing it would lead to actors gaming it. How would you randomize it? Random why order? Then I will just place more orders maybe. Random across actors? Then maybe I add more actors to the pool. Instead of stroking your ego talking about time, I hope you realize that the solutions to fair market participation can be challenging and it’s not as easy to just make a blanket statement.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]

infecto 3y ago

Sorry not going to stoop at your level of calling your comment dumb but next time you should try to elevate yourself. You are making blanket statements without any substance. I was simply pointing out that it is silly to make blanket statements that people should not be focusing their efforts on financial markets. It is a complex benefit and problem and it demonstrates the lack of education by saying timing is not an important aspect of price discovery. I agree there are probably negative aspects but I think it’s a complicated problem to unravel.

AlbertCory 3y ago
"dumb" is making junior-high level statements like "Who are you to say people should not focus on what they want?" That doesn't deserve any more of an "elevated" answer.
- infecto 3y ago
  Ahh more insults and no evidence. Well done. I don’t know who hurt you or how I said anything to cause such a reaction but please relax. All I am saying is it’s a lot more complex then just saying it’s bad and serves no purpose. I think there is probably a middle ground too but I would not even know how to get there. IEX still serves very little volume so I would say the market is not concerned about the current setup. Would love to know why you think it’s so bad.
  - freshpots 3y ago
    That's their MO. Insults, and playing the victim, with very little contribution to the conversation at hand beyond those two things.
  - AlbertCory 3y ago
    "people should not focus on what they want" is so adolescent that it doesn't require any further dismissal.
    - infecto 3y ago

lost_tourist 3y ago

I agree and it gives an unfair advantage to those who have a lot more money and resources to game the system. A 1 second tick seems plenty fast enough as someone else suggested.