Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:High Speed Trading is a Dangerous Fiction (Score 1) 156

You, like so many others seem to be under the impression that there was some 'golden age' of capitalism where stock market trading was a level playing field and anyone could waltz onto the NYSE floor and bid up some stocks. There have always been barriers to entry to directly trading on these markets, back then it was buying/renting a seat on the exchange. Now it's technology costs and fees to co-locate in the exchange's datacenter. And most exchanges these days will spool fiber within these datacenters so each entity has equal latency to the matching engines. Of course it's only the most serious players who can participate like this but then again, it was only the most serious players who bought seats on the trading floor in the good ol' days. The everyday Joe has always had to operate through a broker and it's no different today, except spreads are smaller and fees are cheaper.

That's not to say there aren't problems with the current paradigm of algorithmic high-speed trading. I think there's significant risk in turning over billions of dollars to algos that may interact with each other in unpredictable ways that distort valuation before humans can intervene. But I take issue with people pretending these markets were somehow more fair to everyday investors before they became electronic, because that simply wasn't the case.

Comment Re:Why are taxi drivers all so horrible? (Score 1) 295

I'm calling B.S. on these statistics until you can prove you didn't pull them out of your ass. It seems to me that independent taxi drivers would be a-ok with Uber, since they can voluntarily sign up to be an Uber driver and get referrals for business they wouldn't have had otherwise. Why are they protesting?

Comment Re:Should the US government censor political blogs (Score 1) 308

Okay, so maybe it should be structured differently. Like a voucher system. Everyone gets, say 5 vouchers per election cycle they can donate to any candidate or party they would like. With those vouchers, candidates or parties can "buy" airtime/billboards/whatever. Let's not tie this to major parties only, please. I personally don't give a shit if the American Nazi Party gets airtime. We have to rely on people to filter out the bullshit on their own, otherwise we'll necessarily end up with censorship.

The main take-away is that money is not an equalizer and should not be relied upon for a functioning democracy.

Comment Re:Should the US government censor political blogs (Score 1) 308

So you think our current system is perfect; anyone with access to millions of dollars should be allowed to influence elections in any way they see fit. That must be why congress has the best approval ratings we've seen in years and politicians don't have to waste any time/resources campaigning when they could be, you know, doing their jobs.

Give me a break.

I agree that we should be careful with how we restructure elections. Rather than worry about how to restrict money flowing into elections (and dealing with "first amendment" issues) we should prohibit all political donations and give all candidates a set amount to work with to reach their constituents. I don't pretend to know the details of how a system like this should work, but it's certainly better than restricting political speech to individuals/groups with millions of $$$ to throw around.

Submission + - Comcast Acquiring Time Warner Cable In All-Stock Deal Worth $45 Billion 1

An anonymous reader writes: Comcast has agreed to buy Time Warner Cable for $45 billion in stock, in a deal that would combine the nation's two biggest cable operators, according to people familiar with the situation. The boards of both companies have approved the transaction, which will be announced Thursday morning, one of the people said. If this merger goes thru, the new cable giant would tower over its closest video competitor, DirecTV, which has about 20 million video customers.

Submission + - Slashdot creates beta site users express theirs dislike (slashdot.org) 4

who_stole_my_kidneys writes: Slashdot started redirecting users in February to its newly revamped webpage and received a huge backlash from users. The majority of comments dislike the new site while some do offer solutions to make it better. The question is will Slashdot force the unwanted change on its users that clearly do not want change?

Submission + - Once Slashdot beta has been foisted upon me, what site should I use instead? 2

somenickname writes: As a long time Slashdot reader, I'm wondering what website to transition to once the beta goes live. The new beta interface seems very well suited to tablets/phones but, it ignores the fact that the user base is, as one would expect, nerds sitting in front of very large LCD monitors and wasting their employers time. It's entirely possible that the browser ID information gathered by the site has indicated that they get far more hits on mobile devices where the new interface is reasonable but, I feel that no one has analyzed the browser ID (and screen resolution) against comments modded +5. I think you will find that most +5 comments are coming from devices (real fucking computers) that the new interface does not support well. Without an interface that invites the kind of users that post +5 comments, Slashdot is just a ho-hum news aggregation site that allows comments. So, my question is, once the beta is the default, where should Slashdot users go to?

Submission + - Slashdot beta sucks 9

An anonymous reader writes: Maybe some of the slashdot team should start listening to its users, most of which hate the new user interface. Thanks for ruining something that wasn't broken.

Slashdot Top Deals

Egotist: A person of low taste, more interested in himself than in me. -- Ambrose Bierce

Working...