Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Let's replace Congress with these lab brains! (Score 1) 190

If we replaced Congress with these brains, perhaps putting them in large, bubbling jars with nametags, we could get much better throughput of congressional workload, much less whining, and less likelihood of leaving on vacation on a moment's notice, just before an important vote.

We'd need voting output lights, perhaps like Captain Christopher Pike (Yes, No, Low Battery). And if one acts up? Dump out the jar and refill it with another. Problem solved.

Comment Re:40 minutes (Score 1) 253

Tepples, I noticed that you are using the standard 8-bit bytes in your calculations.

Did telcos/ISPs actually do away with the 10-bit bytes (1 start bit + 8 bits data +1 stop bit) when dial-up modem went away?

On a side note, are ISPs that display GB (and really mean GigaBIT, instead of using "Gb") trying to trick us so we think GigaBYTE and believe their service is 8-10x faster than it really is?

Comment Re:Simple solution... (Score 1) 310

...minimum holding time of, say, 7 days. If you aren't investing in the company, you shouldn't be buying its shares., AC. Traders AREN'T Investors. We rarely care about company fundamentals, only price movement. Some idiotic move like this would hamstring the entire stock market. Oops, what? There's a global market that wouldn't do this, and only the U.S. loses big-time? Again, B.S. on you.

Comment Re:Seems dubious to me. (Score 1) 195

Here it is:

Monsanto using MPAA and RIAA tactics (Score:0) by Anonymous Coward on Tue Apr 08, '14 06:24 PM (#46700087)

Monsanto and Cargil do some really shitty things with their IP when it comes to their seeds - like suing farmers for having Monsanto's crops growing in their fields when they weren't purchased and suing seed washers for alleged violations of IP.

Comment Re:Why not just a small transaction fee? (Score 1) 342

A simple transaction cost of maybe 1cent per share wouldn't affect a normal buyer at all,

Oh, yes it would. Say I'm a small trader with a small account of $10,000. No margin. I'm trading stocks under $2.00, and I buy 1000-2000 shares at a time (that's $2000-$4000 per position). I get charged $8 to buy or sell, so that's $16 in fees for one round-trip (buy and sell) trade.

Adding a $0.01 fee PER SHARE (not per transaction) adds in a $10 (1000x0.01) to $20 (2000x0.01) fee, so that's $20-$40 in extra fees per trade, plus the $16 per trade = $36-$56 just for ONE round-trip trade.

With fees like that, I might as well telephone in each trade to a broker and hand them the fees, and give up on individual trading altogether. I'd have to make that up in higher and higher profit for every trade that I make. Sometimes I'm only making $50 gross on a trade, and $34 net profit after the broker fees. That's not a lot.

Comment Re:Won't work (Score 1) 342

There isn't any way for an HFT company to see an order "on its way" to an exchange.

Leaked info? No, try sold your information, and it's not insider trading. It's called Payment for order flow where brokers sell your intent to buy or sell to HFT companies. Before the trade takes place.

Quote from WSJ posting on 4/6/2014: "Shares of E*Trade Financial Corp. ETFC +0.05% , Charles Schwab Corp. SCHW +0.27% and TD Ameritrade Holding Corp. AMTD +0.26% tumbled last week amid concerns that regulators would ban a practice that allows brokerages to collect hundreds of millions of dollars a year in revenue by selling orders to middlemen who use high-frequency strategies to trade with the brokers' customers. The practice, called payment for order flow, has gained more attention since the release of "Flash Boys," a book by Michael Lewis that argues the markets are "rigged" to benefit high-frequency traders, allegations that are stirring up long-running questions about the fairness of markets."

Submission + - UK campaigners call for ban on "Killer Robots" (

Guru2Newbie writes: LONDON (Reuters) — Machines with the ability to attack targets without any human intervention must be banned before they are developed for use on the battlefield, campaigners against "killer robots" urged on Tuesday.

The weapons, which could be ready for use within the next 20 years, would breach a moral and ethical boundary that should never be crossed, said Nobel Laureate Jody Williams, of the "Campaign To Stop Killer Robots".

"If war is reduced to weapons attacking without human beings in control, it is going to be civilians who are going to bear the brunt of warfare," said Williams, who won the 1997 peace prize for her work on banning landmines.

Weapons such as remotely piloted drones are already used by some armed forces and companies are working on developing systems with a greater level of autonomy in flight and operation.

"We already have a certain amount of autonomy," said Noel Sharkey, professor of Artificial Intelligence and Robotics at the University of Sheffield.

"I think we are already there. If you asked me to go and make an autonomous killer robot today, I could do it. I could have you one here in a few days," he told reporters.

Slashdot Top Deals

Technological progress has merely provided us with more efficient means for going backwards. -- Aldous Huxley