5 ms·

Yep. They're calling it a "glitch" to suggest something unavoidable, a problem that could have happened to anyone. It's same vein of bullshit we heard in 2008

Yep. They're calling it a "glitch" to suggest something unavoidable, a problem that could have happened to anyone. It's same vein of bullshit we heard in 2008 "We couldn't possibly have known!" and more recently with the string of "rogue traders". In every case, its just a bunch of folks who don't want to take responsibility for their gambles when they lose.

jwoah12 14y ago
You are completely wrong. Try looking into the circumstances before you make some unfounded accusation about what caused this. Comparing a 45 minute isolated incident at a firm with an otherwise-excellent reputation to the housing crisis or rogue traders is moronic.
- incision 14y ago
  You're missing the point entirely. They gambled on an algorithm and everything related to engineering and operating it. On some level or another they failed spectacularly and they're calling it a "glitch" - a minor malfunction, a transient error, a spurious little blip. Say what? $440 million dollars pissed away over the course of 45 minutes is not a glitch by any stretch of the imagination. It's a failure of epic proportions at multiple levels. Failure to test, to review, to react and finally failure to own up.
  - sseveran 14y ago
    They did not gamble. Market making doesn't involve gambling. Someone checked in an egregious error that testing failed to find. The fact that it is in a trading system makes the cost of the bug easy to measure.
    - incision 14y ago
      What on earth are you talking about? Market makers gamble on their ability to set spreads that will produce a profit. They're using code to generate spreads, execute head fakes and stuff quotes to their advantage. They're "players" as much as anyone.
vtry 14y ago
Bingo, and this is the main reason for the downfall of our world.
harryh 14y ago
How are they not taking responsibility? They lost the money. They aren't getting it back. What more responsibility could they take?

jwoah12 14y ago

You are completely wrong. Try looking into the circumstances before you make some unfounded accusation about what caused this. Comparing a 45 minute isolated incident at a firm with an otherwise-excellent reputation to the housing crisis or rogue traders is moronic.

incision 14y ago
You're missing the point entirely. They gambled on an algorithm and everything related to engineering and operating it. On some level or another they failed spectacularly and they're calling it a "glitch" - a minor malfunction, a transient error, a spurious little blip. Say what? $440 million dollars pissed away over the course of 45 minutes is not a glitch by any stretch of the imagination. It's a failure of epic proportions at multiple levels. Failure to test, to review, to react and finally failure to own up.
- sseveran 14y ago
  They did not gamble. Market making doesn't involve gambling. Someone checked in an egregious error that testing failed to find. The fact that it is in a trading system makes the cost of the bug easy to measure.
  - incision 14y ago
    What on earth are you talking about? Market makers gamble on their ability to set spreads that will produce a profit. They're using code to generate spreads, execute head fakes and stuff quotes to their advantage. They're "players" as much as anyone.

vtry 14y ago

Bingo, and this is the main reason for the downfall of our world.

harryh 14y ago

How are they not taking responsibility? They lost the money. They aren't getting it back. What more responsibility could they take?