. As long as you place trades on the book that you're willing to fill based on the rules of that market

So, here's the problem, and it's in TFS ...

Sarao allegedly modified these orders frequently so that they remained close to the market price, and typically canceled the orders without executing them

In which case we're talking straight up fraud and criminal activity.

If you can manipulate the market with trades you can actually afford to make, you have big giant cojones and lots of resources.

This guy, not so much.

Sorry, but the initial claim about vaccines causing autism were made by a man who was proven to be lying and had to his papers retracted.

There never was any credible evidence for this, and it has been perpetuated by idiots like Jenny McCarthy. Who is too stupid to take medical advice from.

Which means expecting someone else to disprove a collective delusion is a fucking waste of time.

Watching Sponge Bob causes cancer ... now, you disprove it as I sit here and go la la la ... that is essentially the epic stupidity coming out of the anti-vaxer camp. They expect people to disprove their irrational theory, while they themselves have zero evidence to support it.

Some asshole lied about something, and a bunch of people with insufficient critical thinking skills have continued to act as if it is true.

One thing the anti-vaxers don't seem to know is there has never been a single, credible source to actually suggest the link to autism. Not one. But stupid has its own momentum, and people keep believing a completely unfounded story.

It's a pity we have to spend research money on crap like this.

It diverts resources from useful things, so that stupid people who think Jenny McCarthy is a fucking credible source of medical information can still choose to be stupid people and not listen to facts.

But it essentially becomes a fishing expedition, and that is what the 4th is supposed to prevent.

So you go from "gee, sir, you made a bad lane change" to "well, let's see, why don't we hold you until something we have no probable cause can be investigated". They can escalate this kind of thing really quick, and go outside of the law.

In a world in which police can steal your money without oversight of the court by saying "well, he had cash, and we thought it might be drug related (wink wink) so we took it" ... if you don't put checks and balances on the police it's worse than not having them in the first place.

If your police can participate in shake down rackets to try to find cash they can claim was the proceeds of crime, and have a drug dog check you on the basis of a traffic stop with no other probable cause ... then it's time to start shooting the police, and saying "fuck it, we'll live in anarchy".

When the police don't give a crap about the law, it's time to stop respecting the police or pretending that they're doing any good.

So, I say "fuck the police" if they're just there to fuck us. Failure to follow the laws says most police are inept, or crooks.

And if they can't weed out the bad ones in their ranks, then it's time to assume they're all crooked or incompetent, and force the bastards to wear body cameras 100% of the time. Because, really, you simply can't take the police at their word any more.

You sure as fuck can't count on them to properly interpret the law.

Your rights on line is a catch all for .. well, your legal rights.

Maybe you don't care, but many of us actually do care that law enforcement has been shitting on the Constitution for years and deciding the law is what they say it is.

Police offices these days are crooks who reinterpret the law as they choose. And it's about time it became acknowledged that it's not how it is supposed to be. Police who are doing these things should be fired without a pension, and criminally charged.

You may not give a shit about your 4th amendment rights, but other people do.

Isn't this statism in practice?

Actually, no this isn't statism in practice.

This is what happens when people who like to use the word statism fuck with the system to put power in the hands of corporations at the expense of everybody else.

This is not a natural outcome of having a government.

This is a natural outcome of people who think corporations should be able to do anything they want, and that the "market" will solve all problems.

People who believe corporations should be able to act without regulation have been responsible for making this shit a reality. This has NOTHING to do with the basic premise of having a government, and EVERYTHING to do with greedy bastards subverting the system to tilt it in favor of corporations.

It's the people claiming that corporations and profit seeking are inherently good, and that removing regulations will somehow magically produce good outcomes who caused this mess. Once you set up your system to be beholden to corporate interests, it's pretty much fucked and will descend further into corruption.

Sorry, but the more we pretend that anything corporations do is good, right and proper, the more stupid shit like this happens.

Can they do this without it being visible light?

I'm pretty sure you could really mess up some epileptics this way.

Not to mention I can see this giving some people migraines ... I know many many people who can see the flickering of fluorescent lights.

Cool, awesome, yay progress. But I don't want to be in a place where I am aware of the flashing lights.

And Corporations as nothing more than groups of individual citizens, are or course allowed to do all of this as well.

Of course, my problem with this bullshit statement is it is a complete fucking lie.

This is not groups of individual citizens, this is the CEO and a couple of other executives pushing for what they want.

This has nothing at all to do with the collective will of groups of citizens. This is a handful of people who act as if they're nobly representing the views of groups of citizens.

What they're actually doing it furthering their own interests, at the expense of everybody else, and having it paid for by their shareholders.

They are just playing by the rules of the system, as is. Not sure you can fault them for that.

Oh, horseshit.

Corporations bought and fucking paid for those rules. That doesn't make them good.

It means the politicians have been corrupt long enough that idiots think that a broken and corrupt system is just "the rules of the system".

Eat the rich, and shoot the politicians if this is the fucking status quo.

Is it a democracy when the outcomes are bought by corporate interests by giving money to greedy politicians to influence the outcomes?

I think not.

This is just a corrupt system masquerading as something else.

This is how banana republics operate, but that seems to be where we're going.

Yup, essentially the politicians have set it up so they can be openly bribed/bought off to give corporations more consideration than the rest of us.

If this doesn't show how corrupt and broken the system is, I have no idea what will.

There's no way the politicians will change the law so they can no longer get paid ... it's simply too lucrative.

They're all crooks, and should be thrown in jail.

The only time I have ever been aware of hitting a mobile site is when you have that "gah, WTF is this crap?" moment where you can't find anything and the link you followed has been swallowed by the crap which has said :"hey, you're on a mobile, how about we fail to show you what you were looking for?".

As I said, on my tablet I'm constantly saying "request desktop site", because the mobile website is utterly useless. It's worse than useless, because it's just a redirect to a badly written website with crap content.

I have yet to see a useful mobile website. And most places now are so damned focused on having their own damned app, which in many cases is not as useful as their website ... but, hey, it's an app so we're cool, right?

In the mid 90's a friend said to me that "everything as the web" had put user interface design back by 20 years. Mobile websites and many apps seem hell bent on continuing to deliver shitty interfaces.

For many many sites on my tablet, I don't care about your damned app (because you just want access to too much stuff on my phone and want to embed ads) ... honestly, I'm better off skipping the app and going to the actual website.

I hope we reach "peak phone" soon, because for those of us who don't spend every waking moment with our cell phone, the shit which is focused around that is kind of tedious.

The honest answer to this question is Google cares about one thing, and one thing only ... their fucking ad revenue.

So they've decided they'll use their dominant position to try to force everybody into re-tooling their sites to make sure Google makes as much money as possible.

Never mind that most mobile versions of websites are utter garbage which are unusable and impossible to find anything, and that links you follow are immediately broken.

This is purely about Google's revenue stream.

But, yes, I agree with you ... when I'm searching from my desktop I don't give a flying crap if the site has a mobile presence or not, because I usually have to request the desktop site for it to be useful.

But then Google would need to know you're a desktop, otherwise they're going to have different set of search results. And they don't want that.

I can't tell you how often I have to tell my browser on my tablet to give me the real desktop site ... because most mobile sites are complete shit.

Links don't work, you don't have the same information, the layout is terrible, and you can't find anything.

In my experience and opinion, most mobile websites are written by morons, to satisfy a checkbox defined by marketing, and are generally pretty much useless.

Since most phones run at the same resolution as a desktop ... WTF is the purpose of a badly written mobile site?