whyme

I haven't read the book, but I've followed the chatter and have been listening to Lewis on Bloomberg. I get the impression that many justify HFT by comparing current or past alternatives, however his argument is that HFT is corrupting an otherwise fairer market place. In other words the market should improve and lessen these side businesses that victimize participants and add to the discredit of the exchanges.

If anyone thinks that these side business do not victimize participants you should look back to examples like Knight Capitals glitch that most certainly caused retail investors to lose trust and pull their money from the market, taking a loss. The introduction of non-relevant code is an unnecessary risk that does corrupt the system and does victimize your average investor.

1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfina...

I think you missed the "we" part.

It's sad that I as a retail investor need to spend my valuable time focusing on how not to get screwed by the exchanges that have introduced a side business which does not serve the functioning of the market and instead corrupts it.

This may appear spammy, but I found Kepner Trego training[1] to really help prevent this kind of stuff from happening. The strategy is more effective when everybody in the room has had the training, which limits its usefulness with external clients, but I'll still recommend it anyway.

1. http://www.kepner-tregoe.com/pdfs/pubworkbro/psdmbroch06-07....

So you think BA's can not learn, even through experience, what can or can not be done?

Sure, there's always somebody else, same role or not, who has more expertise, but don't confuse role/title for expertise. I've seen BA's with a decade of experience school junior engineers on what can or can not be done.

However, this is illustrating a particular problem that only affects engineers -- engineers are the ones at the end of the day who have to make a solution reality.

This is simply not true. In the past I was a Business Analyst. I would meet with clients to gather requirements and that illustration would often unfold in the same manner.

It has nothing to do with a persons role, it has everything to do with having large knowledge or expertise gaps.

I subscribe to the minimalism approach. i.e. I do my best to improve the signal to noise ratio (which is inline with the authors goal).

Also, in many cases, having a both the unit test and the comment is a redundancy.

I'll suggest there's a missing ingredient here...I found I was able to eliminate many of my comments by asking myself if that someone whom might read my code would be better served with a unit test instead. I also found, however, that this needs to lead to an understanding that unit test are in fact a form of documentation and should be treated as such.

And https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7497688

For the OP: maybe log this as a poll?

Here's a wasteful comment as my test...I might delete it. If you see this can you add a reply. Only if not already done. Thanks.

yeah, i should have said in high quantities, but I was just paraphrasing the video. The point was, in the video, he did not say it was just fructose, glucose can also be a problem.

I'm pretty sure, in that video, the argument was that while glucose is still really bad for you, fructose[1] is much, much worse - it's a poison that's causing an epidemic.

1. And specifically the manufactured fructose isolates vs. natural fructose found in fruit.

Edit: rather glucose in high quantities as noted in response below.

Ever seen those web adverts that list a few generic health problems and ask you to 'click here', or read a horoscope that makes claims almost anyone can relate to?

So how is this different? Why so many upvotes...really, this is just more spam - is it not?

I wouldn't discuss with the Microsoft rep. This is a decision your school needs to make.

You could politely decline to participate and provide your reasons for doing so. If your department feels strongly enough about it then let one of them volunteer to do it. If no one volunteers, then obviously they don't feel strongly about it. Your declining to participate sends a strong message.

Unfortunately, things like this are more damaging overall. i.e. Even if you succeed and get some more women involved, you will have also created resentment from men whom are not given equal opportunity, which then can lead to women not being given equal opportunity.

I suggest you don't perpetuate the problem / don't participate.

For those who don't know HN has a RSS link.

https://news.ycombinator.com/rss

I downloaded a rss reader app then put in the main HN link, but the app rejected it. The RSS link worked. This may seem obvious to some, but may help others.

As I said, I'm all for having a great framework.

When I make mistakes, which I often do, I don't go around thinking oh, darn, they should have known that for me. That goes for using a bad framework or lack thereof.

As I said, I'm all for having a great framework, but I would not excuse the mistakes being made here, and I'm simply saying that I believe that my products and my knowledge level benefited by not having one.

Having bad password management and opening everyone up to CSRF and XSS is not "trivial".

I'm not suggesting everyone should need to be aware of these issues, I'm saying someone on your team should be. And if you're a team of one, be prepared to make mistakes (which will not be limited to the issues outlined here).

The argument here is "build a clojure framework lots of people use.

The argument I am addressing is that people are deploying products with poor security because a great, all encompassing, framework does not exist. There's no excuse for doing that.

This is not about having to understand cryptography, it's about knowing when and where you need to use it and making sure it's included when you do. The issues outlined in the video are trivial.

This is a standard developer response

vs. a what? I've worn many hats in my day, the least of which has been a developer hat.

There's equal risk in relying on a code base incorporating features with underlying concepts that you or your team does not understand.

I'm all for having a framework, where you can review the code and be comfortable with what you're relying on, but in the absence of having a good one, well then build one. The benefits Clojure brings to the table more than make up for the work in either case.

There's just no excuse for not knowing the concepts and not knowing if your product needs them.

I've spent the last 3 years developing in Clojure and found I was quite happy not having an all encompassing framework. It forced me to learn all these issues and understand them well enough to be able to customize each and align them with a products design.

Sure it's more work, but in my mind, it's worth it.

To me this is like posting my password on the wall so that I don't forget.

I turned the data plan off on my smartphone about 1 month after I bought my first tablet. What sucks is finding a phone, in today's market, having a decent screen plus keyboard for texting. It's looking like Im going to have to buy a blackberry Q10, even though, really, I'm overpaying for my actual needs. Anyone know of other more affordable options out there that don't make me look like I'm on the A-TEAM? Is it possible there's actually a really big opportunity for phone makers that's being missed here?

I don't see the how part as something worth getting into. It's also dependant on the technological advancements and makeup of society at the time change starts to happen.

It took centuries for the monetary systems to develop with many bumps a long the way. That will also need to happen in a resource managed economy.

How is not relevant. What's relevant is that society has to change to the point where it becomes possible and also a priority. I do believe, unfortunately[1], that the money system has to collapse first.

1. unfortunately in the sense that some hardship will follow suit.

The number of variables to account for are far greater than the number of ideas coming from within comments here.

I'll give you just one to try and add to your spreadsheet: When you add a saftey net and provide money to those that, otherwise, would not have it to spend you obviously increase government revenue through new employment and taxation. How would you quantify that increase? I don't think anyone can say, but it would happen and it would be significant.

"...is that governments manipulate the money supply for political reasons."

That's the power hungry part I'm talking about. The government is not some machine that is broken, it's a select group of people within our society running around trying to balance appeasing the public horde while trying to amass as much power as possible. The behaviour of the people within government is a reflection of the state and quality of our society as a whole.

LOL. It just dawned on me that post happy people are probably the most active people, thus best suited to do a job requiring quite a lot of work. I never seem to give pg enough credit.

I think I'll skip the debate over "the size of things" and just suggest there's a significant problem with our current rate of utilization and fair distribution. If your argument is simply that we have room for optimizing the worlds resources, then sure I can agree with that, but frankly I doubt that's going to work very well under a model that's really dog eat dog and has a hoarding, power hungry society that uses money as the means to manage the distribution and ownership of things.

Have you considered using some avg. rank threshold instead of karma for both this and down voting? or rather some blend of profile age, minimum karma, and avg. rank?

I look at 1000 karma and wonder why you would empower people who could simply be post happy.