Algorithmic trading improves market efficiency during normal times would be the majority opinion in finance.
Only by people that ignore that the premise of the stock market was to allow people to invest in companies that they believe have the potential to positively impact society. When you discard the premise of the stock market, it becomes a game of who can outsmart the majority of traders and end up taking their money. When looked at from this perspective, it's obvious that a lot of time and energy is being expended for the sole purpose of "winning" while other people lose money they invested. This type of system is harmful to society as it promotes a disproportionate distribution of wealth within society since those with money will be able to dedicate significant resources toward taking money from other traders under the guise that the amount that they take will exceed the amount they expend.
The stock market has potential to help societies advance but the current incarnation has only benefited the wealthy while harming society at large.
But your claim of "waste of time and energy" is unheard of among experts and professionals.
That is a result of survivor bias. If someone doesn't believe that the stock market trading is a positive influence on society then why would they become an expert/professional specifically dealing with something that harms society?
It's your preconceived notions that are preventing you seeing what is in front of your face.
Did some automated trading occur as a result of algorithmic correlation? Yes. Is it responsible for the sell-off? No, the people who programmed them are responsible for that. Is automated trading a waste of energy and a threat to everyone? Yes.
The only way to unfuck the stock market is to put a cooldown penalty on buying and selling. You can buy or sell as fast as you want but if you buy and sell the same stock too soon then you should pay a penalty. Also, make all the fucking dark pools illegal already.
it's easy to fall into the trap of finding one correlation that seems to explain everything.
I'll add that it's particularly easy, in my opinion, for theorists to fall into this trap.
Oh dang, you're right! That's explains everything!
While this is mostly mismanagement, this statement is just silly.
Not at all. If climate change was not occurring the same outcome would have been reached.
With the level of mismanagement they did, the outcome was invariable. Therefore climate change could be removed as being a factor in the outcome and thus 0 percent a result of climate change.
"When it concerns English-speaking people, we call it" idiocy under the sub-category "Tragedy of the Commons".
"rational individuals optimizing their personal well-being" is a euphemism that greedy fools like you use to avoid acknowledging your own greed and foolishness.
It is not possible to "run out."
It is, however, *very* possible to neglect to build infrastructure to collect enough water from the environment to meet your specific needs.
You got it wrong. What they did is pump the aquifers dry and that caused the land to collapse. As a result, the natural storage of water in the land can no longer happen. They destroyed naturally occurring water infrastructure by pumping out all the water they could. This was an easily avoidable issue and they were warned this was happening and yet they did nothing.
Since at least 2008, scientists have warned that unchecked groundwater pumping for the city and for agriculture was rapidly draining the country’s aquifers. The overuse did not just deplete underground reserves—it destroyed them, as the land compressed and sank irreversibly. One recent study found that Iran’s central plateau, where most of the country’s aquifers are located, is sinking by more than 35 centimeters each year. As a result, the aquifers lose about 1.7 billion cubic meters of water annually as the ground is permanently crushed, leaving no space for underground water storage to recover, says Darío Solano, a geoscientist at the National Autonomous University of Mexico, who was not involved with the study.
“We saw this coming,” Solano says.
Climate change did zero percent of the damage. Instead, what has occurred is 100% the result of idiocy. So yes, it has something in common with climate change but it's not the same thing at all.
Just because the coroner finds that the victim was days away from having a fatal brain aneurysm doesn't make you less guilty of murdering them.
This is a specification for UNIX.
Wrong. Neither Linux nor UNIX are mentioned in the specification. However, it should be noted that the specification is hosted on Freedesktop.org which clearly states on their site that...
Freedesktop.org is a project to work on interoperability and shared base technology for free-software desktop environments for the X Window System (X11) and Wayland on Linux and other Unix-like operating systems.
They do mention Linux and Unix-like operating systems being target operating system. However, there is no mention of UNIX systems specifically. Additionally, nobody claimed it was exclusively Linux, only that it would impact Linux users.
Honestly, if I were you, I would be dreadfully embarrassed for making such a boisterous pronouncement only to be shown to be a obnoxious fool.
Searched internet, found info:
China, long-haul + shot-haul: ~70%
USA, long-haul + shot-haul: ~72%
China, rail transport: 20-22%
USA, rail transport: ~28%
Even with the long-haul and short-haul numbers combined, it's fairly clear that China is as reliant on long-haul trucking as the USA is. However, given the authoritarian nature of the Chinese government, those numbers could shift.
For a second there, I was sure that they had discovered that some of us are lizard people.
Dye them bright colors and tell idiots theyâ(TM)ll look cool if they carry their phone around in one.
"Lead us in a few words of silent prayer." -- Bill Peterson, former Houston Oiler football coach