3 ms·

>> WiFi is slow though, I just want a lan box. hahahaha :D OK, dear anon4, do you have idea what the fastest connection to the stock market today is, no? Hint

by X4 13y ago

>> WiFi is slow though, I just want a lan box. hahahaha :D OK, dear anon4, do you have idea what the fastest connection to the stock market today is, no? Hint, it's "wireless". High Frequency Trading set an arms race to have the best and fastest connection to the trade-market. Every nanosecond counts. TL;DR? Wireless is faster than Cable. Yup.

anon4 13y ago
What I mean is that I currently get my internet via a LAN cable that goes into my router box. I have a tower PC hooked via a cable to it and a laptop that connects via WiFi. The tower can achieve the full 5 megabytes/sec I pay for, while WiFi maxes out at about 1½ mbytes/sec. It's slow.
- Shivetya 13y ago
  It sounds as if either your laptop's wifi card is old or your router is. 5mb is nothing, 802.11n can easily handle that (its about 20) and dual band connections can push it a bit higher. Where WiFi at home is breaking down is some cable companies are offering 30, 50, or more down. Then there is Fiber which just blows past what most people will get out of home WiFi networks.
  - will_work4tears 13y ago
    "802.11n can easily handle that (its about 20)" Is that all? I haven't benchmarked mine, but it claims 300Mbps, and I've never noticed any speedup on my video streaming by switching to ethernet (my internet speed is ~28Mbps). It's possible I just wouldn't notice an ~8Mbps speed up though.
  - anon4 13y ago
    Yes, it's g, not n. I still would rather have cabled-delivered ethernet than a literal ether net.
- nickjackson 13y ago
  Are you getting your megabytes and your megabits the right way round? Either way, your wifi is so very slow and you probably have a fault.
pjc50 13y ago
Nope. If you're not in the same datacenter you're too slow; all the HFT systems are in racks next to the exchange rack communicating over 10G Ethernet. Source: actually working on an HFT project.
- X4 13y ago
  @pjc50 Thank you for your input, really appreciated. What you say is that proximity gives you more benefit than having antennas transmitting data 'wireless', right? I agree with that and I don't, firstly because "Quantum Teleportation (QT)" is available soon enough for a broader audience than just Physicists [1] and such "directed antennas" positioned in the same proximity to the datacenter as the 10G links can result in equal or higher bandwidth. Otherwise it's an unfair comparison. Also QT is making rounds in the defense and aerospace industry now much more than ever, because they could use it to send data to satellites much faster than with earlier methods. Please correct me, if I'm wrong, but I'd be grateful, if you had a source for your argument. :) TL;DR: » If you're not in the same datacenter you're too slow; That applies to wireless and for cable. By the way, what's your job title, if I may ask? -- [1] http://qcmc2012.org/ http://qcmc2012.org/
  - Kell 13y ago
    ... Quantum teleportation as a mean of transmitting information ? You know that as of today, QT is completely unable of transmitting data... It transmits a quantum state instantly yes, but that "transmission" cannot in any way be used to transmit any form of data, it would be a severe breach of relativity theory. Look, it's the second sentence of the Wikipedia article on the subject : "Because it depends on classical communication, which can proceed no faster than the speed of light, it cannot be used for superluminal transport or communication of classical bits" [1]. And anyway, the Quantum Communication Measurement and Computing Conference, is not about QT, even if it is probably a discussed subject. The scope of that conference is : "Quantum Cryptography and Quantum Communications, Quantum Measurement and Quantum Metrology, Quantum Computing and Quantum Information Theory, Implementations of Quantum Information Processing and Quantum Simulations, Quantum Control, Foundations of Quantum Physics" [2]. So QT may serve as a way to allow really fast transmission of data, but for that, first physicist would have to completely reinvent physics. That's of course a possibility. But don't count on it as a "soon enough for a broader audience than just physicists" thing. We are decades away from such a breakthrough. And then, if that sort of breakthrough happens... gosh, that would probably change the face of the world in a much more important way than just a faster wireless data feed. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation [2] http://qcmc2012.org/about-qcmc/ http://qcmc2012.org/about-qcmc/
samolang 13y ago
HFT use microwave, not WiFi.
- X4 13y ago
  Oh great and microwaves are what, not wireless? C'mon please read what people write before you blindly accuse someone of being wrong. I wrote wireless NOT WiFi! But you know what, I'll still give you a free +1, because you tried to help.
  - samolang 13y ago
    Microwave requires line of sight. That's where its advantage arises. You can't assume line of sight with a WiFi router.
    - Aloisius 13y ago
      Microwave is anything from 300 MHz to 300 GHz. WiFi is well within the microwave range as is WiMax, GSM, UHF and VHF. None require line of sight. The only reason you need line of sight is keeping interference down and power requirements (both usually regulatory).
      - samolang 13y ago
        When I said microwave I meant specifically the microwave technology utilized by HFT (I've always heard it referred to as simply 'microwave'). I guess I was mistaken because I read that the microwave used by HFT beats out fiber because light travels faster through air than through glass and mistakenly implied that meant line of sight.

by X4 13y ago

anon4 13y ago

What I mean is that I currently get my internet via a LAN cable that goes into my router box. I have a tower PC hooked via a cable to it and a laptop that connects via WiFi. The tower can achieve the full 5 megabytes/sec I pay for, while WiFi maxes out at about 1½ mbytes/sec. It's slow.

Shivetya 13y ago
It sounds as if either your laptop's wifi card is old or your router is. 5mb is nothing, 802.11n can easily handle that (its about 20) and dual band connections can push it a bit higher. Where WiFi at home is breaking down is some cable companies are offering 30, 50, or more down. Then there is Fiber which just blows past what most people will get out of home WiFi networks.
- will_work4tears 13y ago
  "802.11n can easily handle that (its about 20)" Is that all? I haven't benchmarked mine, but it claims 300Mbps, and I've never noticed any speedup on my video streaming by switching to ethernet (my internet speed is ~28Mbps). It's possible I just wouldn't notice an ~8Mbps speed up though.
- anon4 13y ago
  Yes, it's g, not n. I still would rather have cabled-delivered ethernet than a literal ether net.
nickjackson 13y ago
Are you getting your megabytes and your megabits the right way round? Either way, your wifi is so very slow and you probably have a fault.

pjc50 13y ago

Nope. If you're not in the same datacenter you're too slow; all the HFT systems are in racks next to the exchange rack communicating over 10G Ethernet. Source: actually working on an HFT project.

X4 13y ago
@pjc50 Thank you for your input, really appreciated. What you say is that proximity gives you more benefit than having antennas transmitting data 'wireless', right? I agree with that and I don't, firstly because "Quantum Teleportation (QT)" is available soon enough for a broader audience than just Physicists [1] and such "directed antennas" positioned in the same proximity to the datacenter as the 10G links can result in equal or higher bandwidth. Otherwise it's an unfair comparison. Also QT is making rounds in the defense and aerospace industry now much more than ever, because they could use it to send data to satellites much faster than with earlier methods. Please correct me, if I'm wrong, but I'd be grateful, if you had a source for your argument. :) TL;DR: » If you're not in the same datacenter you're too slow; That applies to wireless and for cable. By the way, what's your job title, if I may ask? -- [1] http://qcmc2012.org/ http://qcmc2012.org/
- Kell 13y ago
  ... Quantum teleportation as a mean of transmitting information ? You know that as of today, QT is completely unable of transmitting data... It transmits a quantum state instantly yes, but that "transmission" cannot in any way be used to transmit any form of data, it would be a severe breach of relativity theory. Look, it's the second sentence of the Wikipedia article on the subject : "Because it depends on classical communication, which can proceed no faster than the speed of light, it cannot be used for superluminal transport or communication of classical bits" [1]. And anyway, the Quantum Communication Measurement and Computing Conference, is not about QT, even if it is probably a discussed subject. The scope of that conference is : "Quantum Cryptography and Quantum Communications, Quantum Measurement and Quantum Metrology, Quantum Computing and Quantum Information Theory, Implementations of Quantum Information Processing and Quantum Simulations, Quantum Control, Foundations of Quantum Physics" [2]. So QT may serve as a way to allow really fast transmission of data, but for that, first physicist would have to completely reinvent physics. That's of course a possibility. But don't count on it as a "soon enough for a broader audience than just physicists" thing. We are decades away from such a breakthrough. And then, if that sort of breakthrough happens... gosh, that would probably change the face of the world in a much more important way than just a faster wireless data feed. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_teleportation [2] http://qcmc2012.org/about-qcmc/ http://qcmc2012.org/about-qcmc/

samolang 13y ago

HFT use microwave, not WiFi.

X4 13y ago
Oh great and microwaves are what, not wireless? C'mon please read what people write before you blindly accuse someone of being wrong. I wrote wireless NOT WiFi! But you know what, I'll still give you a free +1, because you tried to help.
- samolang 13y ago
  Microwave requires line of sight. That's where its advantage arises. You can't assume line of sight with a WiFi router.
  - Aloisius 13y ago
    Microwave is anything from 300 MHz to 300 GHz. WiFi is well within the microwave range as is WiMax, GSM, UHF and VHF. None require line of sight. The only reason you need line of sight is keeping interference down and power requirements (both usually regulatory).
    - samolang 13y ago
      When I said microwave I meant specifically the microwave technology utilized by HFT (I've always heard it referred to as simply 'microwave'). I guess I was mistaken because I read that the microwave used by HFT beats out fiber because light travels faster through air than through glass and mistakenly implied that meant line of sight.