growse

32 ms·

511.
by growse 3y ago
Isn't that because most people understand that trains don't drive on sight? Railways are for trains, roads are for people.
512.
by growse 3y ago
If creative effort was involved in curating that list, sure you can. A book is just a list of words.
513.
by growse 3y ago
I get both latlng and plus codes when selecting a location on the android games client. Plus codes are an open standard, osmand at least also supports them.
514.
by growse 3y ago
Why not plus codes? At least that's an open standard that won't get rug-pulled.
515.
by growse 3y ago
The reason why I think statements like "hey, lets just quantize the market" is that it ignores all the other stuff that you now need to decide. It's half a solution. As mentioned elsewhere, lets say you quantize. How do you
516.
by growse 3y ago
> whoo-hoo! Getting snooty there, aren't you? I think I understand it as well as you do. shrug You're proposing fundamental changes to the way that markets operate, which would have profound (and mostly negative) effects on t
517.
by growse 3y ago
We already have evidence from history (where trading latencies and intervals were much higher) that the spreads become much higher as trading frequency goes down. The spread represents the amount of uncertainty and risk associated with a pr
518.
by growse 3y ago
> You are intentionally exaggerating. He didn't say to add "deliberate randomness" and he didn't say "10 minutes." Sorry, does a "random number generator" mean some other type of randomness? And wh
519.
by growse 3y ago
What is "the public stock exchange"? They're all private entities with their own membership rules. You can buy/sell the same instrument at hundreds of different venues, no-one's forcing you to use any specific marke
520.
by growse 3y ago
By simultaneously , I assume you mean "within one time interval". I suspect you'd be surprised how many orders at the same price can happen in a very very short time window. As for price discovery, a lot of information can
521.
by 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?
522.
by growse 3y ago
Sure, you can trade OTC. Just phone your friends / neighbours and ask if they want to buy your stuff. Maybe put an ad in the local paper.
523.
by growse 3y ago
> > And in which order would orders be executed when they come in and get queued? > That's easy! Come time to match and fill for orders placed at identical prices, there's no reason a random number generator couldn't
524.
by growse 3y ago
Large fund managers (e.g. Fidelity) disagree with you.
525.
by 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?
526.
by growse 3y ago
That'll make everything more expensive, as every trade now has to price in the risk that it won't actually happen. Increasing market friction is not a good idea.
527.
by growse 3y ago
They're providing service at a cost. Like many service providers, to a lot of people the service provided is worth more than the cost.
528.
by growse 3y ago
> I have not found a coherent explanation why HS2 does not link to HS1. The unreasonable cost of rail tickets makes the current scheme a toy for rich people. The current scheme is designed to relieve capacity on the WCML to make way for
529.
by growse 3y ago
You can't use the bsl licensed version if you're at all concerned that Hashicorp might decide at any point in the future that your business "competes" with theirs. It's not about the source code. It's about the
530.
by growse 3y ago
Nobody has any clue what "competing with Hashicorp" actually means now, or what it might mean in the future (what if Oracle buys Hashicorp?). It's vaguely defined deliberately. Most businesses don't like to take vague le
531.
by growse 3y ago
IPV6 doesn't prevent you from natting if you really want to. It just gets rid of the thing that forces you to NAT.
532.
by growse 3y ago
> First, a /16 network is 65536 devices, which is pretty big as-is. "big" is a relative term. For some cases, that's a really annoying restriction. > But it's a bad idea. You will have a shared media that can
533.
by growse 3y ago
> then you could deploy the whole thing without having anybody assigning new addresses. NAT's/configs/etc could keep working. How does a device that thinks that addresses fit in a 32-bit address space send a packet to a d
534.
by growse 3y ago
> (or have it done for them via a router) And then we are back to NAT...
535.
by growse 3y ago
> And once you go over 16 bits, you really need to start dealing with routing. Disagree. you don't want to be routing unless you actually have to. A large flat network is more desirable a lot of the time (e.g thousands of devices in
536.
by growse 3y ago
How do you have two different devices running a webserver on two different IPs at home with NAT?
537.
by growse 3y ago
You're confusing cause and effect. They're very different precisely because of hacky nonsense like NAT.
538.
by growse 3y ago
They're not hostile to the BSL. Other projects that started out under the BSL (e.g. Cockroach) don't draw the ire. The anger is at a company that trades on the benefits of open source, and then shuts that down when it becomes inco
539.
by growse 3y ago
> ... as it n becomes more and more obvious that the benefits of that software flow to giant integrated cloud platform providers rather than to the people who make the software. The whole point of open source is that everybody has the
540.
by growse 3y ago
For this analogy to work, it also needs to include the professor advertising their course and attracting good-will primarily on the basis of their generous policy, and then bait-and-switching involved participants when they later decided th

More ›