It's not a new realization, either. "Havamal", a Viking-Age poem, contains the verse
It is best for man to be middle-wise,
Not over cunning and clever:
The learned man whose lore is deep
Is seldom happy at heart.
Damn. I do that for almost free (I'm on the hook for the pizza every 4th gathering). I just call them "my friends," though.
If you're smart enough to be in Mensa, it should be the work of 1 second to tell whether that will save you more than the membership fee (currently $79/yr in the US). Not for me!
The process tends to be expensive enough that they may opt to avoid wasting the time and money on someone who isn't going to get an offer or refuse the offer given.
First, I'm not convinced drug testing is worth anything in a software engineering environment.
I used to feel that way, then I was tasked with my first code audit. I think I assigned a macro key to "//[TODO] Was this guy high?"
You're both right. What they actually did was even scummier - they included the actual answers on the page if the referrer was Google.
> NO THEY DO NOT! I stopped reading here, because HFTs DO NOT FRONT RUN!
I'm afraid they do. Predicting how their own early trading will boost or lower a stock price is built into HFT, and it's a major source of their profits. it's critical to managing their arbitrage, to predict precisely when to reverse their tactics an individual stock or the whole market rebounds from their leading trades. If they didn't factor in the results of their own trade, _and deliberately game the system_, it would cause even larger oscillations.
> Is more proof that you are ignorant on this matter. It's not insider trading. That again is where you have privileged information.
In this case, the "privileged information" is the microseconds or milliseconds of advance knowledge. Others can't afford the technological advantage, or in fact are blocked by exclusive contract from tapping the fiber optic closer to the stock exchanges. It's currently legal, but it's definitely privileged. The idea that "it's not harmful" is, I'm afraid to say, based in self serving fraud.
> it was always because they were the BEST available option for the trader who was opposing them.
This is blatant nonsense. In an HFT brokered transaction, the HFT trader has intercepted the "best trade" before the other dealers, businesses, or stock owner could possibly have been aware of that "BEST" available option. Also, I'm afraid that the concept that all trades are the "BEST" option is impossible. If they each chose the "BEST" option, they would each know the complete results of the transaction to have perfect knowledge of the results of the trade. They do not, and they cannot: information is limited, and the stock market is a chaotic system. They may be able to make well informed guesses, but there is no more way to predict it perfectly than there are means to perfectly predict the weather.
Sadly, the HFT companies are effectively reading the weather reports before anyone else can see the report and gambling with that information before anyone else gets the data. It's unfair competition.
I think one thing Trump doesn't get credit for because the media is so quick to call him names, is kicking the lawmaking back to Congress. DACA was not a proper law. Trump didn't even "cancel" it. He just refused to RENEW it. It is Congress' responsibility to make law, and especially THAT law. Same with Obamacare. He does not have the executive power to give money to insurance companies. That is Congress' responsibility. They're all just pissy because now they have to do what we elected them for.
Good for them. Saves my time.
Right now, the market is good enough that I ask what the job pays when I'm first called. I've got a gig, and they're calling me. I don't see it as loosing an opportunity. I see it as not wasting my time with someone that isn't serious. Most aren't, looking to offer about 70% of what I'm making now. I like to think I'm helping out the next guy by politely informing the recruiter of how low they are fishing in the barrel.
And yet: seat belt laws -> stop light cameras -> cameras everywhere
Slippery slope does not apply when there is a clear, inevitable path from point A to point B. If I tell you that if you keep increasing the pace of your binge drinking it is going to ruin your liver, I have not made a slippery slope argument. I've told you that A must lead to B. There is not enough money to give every person every medical service that they would like. At some point, someone would have to decide who gets what. In a western culture, that decision maker would most likely be a panel ('cause that's how we roll). That panel would be deciding who lives and dies, i.e. a Death Panel.
I would submit that "risk of complication" is simply a shield to hide behind. The NHS has limited funds and too many people that want access to them. The game becomes one of finding ways to deny players access to those funds. You can't have perfect health care for everybody for free on the cheap.
"We don't care. We don't have to. We're the Phone Company."