4 ms·
That sounds like an interesting wrinkle. The (odds of a) round closing could also be sensitive to the in-rush of sealed bids or even how different later orders
by gojomo 13y ago
That sounds like an interesting wrinkle. The (odds of a) round closing could also be sensitive to the in-rush of sealed bids or even how different later orders are from earlier ones. That might help ensure an early-close either just before, or just after, a wave of orders that hints at information the earlier-bids didn't have. (That is, tick the unseal-matching process based on a signal of substantive change, rather than only wall-clock-time.)
- jacquesm 13y agoBut that way you could force the closing of a round by flooding with bids, effectively giving more control rather than less to anybody trying to abuse this system.
- gojomo 13y agoNot sure that'd be fatal, or worse than the current races. The reset after a calculated flood-to-force-a-round-closure might even bring a compensating external benefit: a slight pause to digest the new information. It all depends on the specific mechanism design, including choices like whether a flood can be guaranteed to land in a certain round... or might wind up as 'first in' to a subsequent round.