244 karma · joined June 18, 2010
My neighorhood in Chicago used this pretty extensively and it really helped keep people connected and aware of what was going on. Sad to see that go.
That is to say, is piracy really that rampant in the US, or are these numbers inflated by distribution in countries where games/movies are pirated and sold in hard copy form on the street or in shops? Which is worse for piracy, the ability to anonymously download the game via bittorrent, or being able to feel psuedo-legitimate about paying real money to a real person on the street or in a shop for a burned copy?
I can see the temptation to just forge ahead on a one time only event like an IPO, but if you do so then I think you need to be prepared for the consequences. I also imagine that part of the usage terms for direct access include something that limit Nasdaq's liability in the event of a system error, so I'm not sure how UBS thinks they will get around that.
At any rate, as the author mentions this isn't really a feasible technology.
One of the primary benefits that market makers (which are often HFT firms) provide is the efficient transfer of risk. That is to say, the value of the company may not change thousands of times a second, but the willingness of existing holders of that stock to continue to do so may change rapidly. Or similarly some participant may suddenly need a hedge and buy this stock because it has the correlation their looking for. This is all to say that there are valid reasons for buying and selling a stock that have no direct (but some indirect) relationship with the value of that company. This is not a game played by retail investors, but it's not just played by HFT firms either. Institutional investors (e.g., my 401k money) will also use financial products in this way.
Or put a completely different way, I may sell my Apple shares because I need the cash back to help pay for a downpayment on my house. Did I sell those shares because I think the value of the company has suddenly changed? No. There are a myriad of reasons participants may move in and out of a position.
Bottom line: Candidates should always like you even if you don't like or need them, especially since you'll likely reject far more people than you hire.
What bothers me slightly is that much of the praise for Jobs seems to equate one with the other. Let's celebrate the man as a visionary entrepreneur, and leave the rest to those that actually knew him.
I think this is a great point. Low-level programming has always required an in-depth understanding of the underlying hardware and that hardware is changing as fast as ever today. It may be true that a large percentage of development can live happily in a land of high-level abstractions, but there will always be a need for low-level optimization and that space is still rapidly changing in very interesting ways.
One of the big arguments in that Slashdot thread seems to be backlash over developers bragging about how they change software that handles millions of dollars in the middle of the day without any testing. Let me tell you, any HFT firm worth it's salt is very conscious about risk controls. I mean honestly, what kind of business are you running if you're routinely exposing yourself to potentially massive losses because of one developers error? Not one that would be around very long.
I can only speak to where I work, but we are not coding by the seat of our pants. Yes, traders do make intraday changes to their strategies, but they can do that because their software is backstopped by a tiered risk infrastructure that limits the damage their software can do.
I tried an experiment where I did a comparison of the __builtin_expect version against a version with our likely/unlikely macros defined to the identity, and I actually saw no difference, which was disappointing. When I did some digging I found this blog post: http://bitsup.blogspot.com/2008/04/measuring-performance-of-... which suggests the same result for the Linux kernel.
FWIW GCC also has a reasonable set of PGO options (not mentioned in this article), and those actually can (anecdotally) make a noticeable difference, although you're subject to the overtraining problem if you're not careful.
In my mind the greatest benefit of a strong CS degree is that it gives you a broad knowledge base to draw on that lets you easily pick up new technologies and concepts. The exposure to particular programming languages or technologies is less important, in large part because our industry moves at a fast enough pace that focused knowledge can quickly become outdated.
All that aside, the best "hands-on" experience you can get is actually working in the industry. I'd much rather see existing CS programs step up their efforts to place students in good internship and co-op experiences than add more software engineering courses.
He's got a PhD in Physical Therapy, so I'd rather listen to what he has to say about being healthy behind a desk than a story with a sensationalist headline.
The real problem is that the market was able to descend to that level to begin with. There should have been some sort of circuit breaker limits in the Mt. Gox system that would have halted such a massive decline, similar to what exist in the US equity and futures markets.
As to #3, really the only thing that matters in terms of exchange access in the US is that you satisfy the appropriate compliance burdens (broker-dealer status) and can pay the fees required for naked access. That may be good selection criteria for "informed traders" but it certainly isn't any guarantee.
- On demand selections are limited, and the interface is usually pretty clunky. If I have a DVR, I have to remember in advance to record something, rather than being able to just grab it after the fact.
- You need to have a physical box, which either arrives outdated or quickly becomes outdated, and they never replace it.
- It costs $60-$70/month for decent cable service where I live, versus $8/month for Netflix. Combine that with Hulu and free on-demand streaming from major TV networks, and it's a great bargain.
The only thing I miss about having cable is being able to channel surf when I'm bored. Honestly, I am probably a more productive human being without wasting my time doing that, so I'm not too disappointed.
If you expect someone to tip poorly, so you give them poor service, of course they are going to tip poorly!
It would depend on the situation, but this seems like it might just be wash at the end in terms of performance?