Another quant user POV of what HFT should be about
These are the comments from a newsletter subscriber:
Hi Bryan, gave me some cheer, thanks. By the way, a lot of this boils down to old guard profiteers getting the wind knocked out of them; imho, to forestall any kind of nonsense about HFT should be followed up on by public automation benefits: that is where the ripening of the movement has the chance to contribute back and knock some legs from underneath “corporate raider-profiteers” (Read Keating alums etc.) that dominated the “old market”. It is not a guarantee of any kind but just a respite from the charge–HFT will have to go a lot further than just numbers on the screen before they can pull the lever on the market gallows, there has been simply too much loss of institutional memory and corrupt lobbying to do so otherwise (again imho).
BTW, if anything — HFT ought to be toasted for having achieved (in a short time) the proofs of civil renegotiations of necessities by their adaption of Moore curves: it is to be hoped that cooler heads will prevail in a prolonged discussion before a Dodd-Frank-Oxley-Sarbanes style solution is arrived at, the public deserves a considerate discussion of the markets frontrunning of technologies that will eventually affect other areas of endeavor even as the technologies themselves go untouched by (incorrectly assessed unscathing criticism) those afraid to kill the goose that lays the golden eggs (or at least to give it free range water to swim upon instead of forcing the fat down its throat in preparation for foie gras). Yeah, I agree — I hope those changes accompany public comment, I think here is where the termites get smoked out of the woodwork and we see if this is really a democracy or an oligarchy with a thinly disguised veneer of public manipulations. Either way, interesting observations will be made on who tries to put their thumbs on the scales.
PS – Here’s what I think has to happen before automation benefits are flexible enough to counteract societal ills: a) HFT feed loops to scrutinize industrial processing, b) semantic processing as industry contexts with sentiment metrics and regulation feed procurements checking on the balances of automation usage to their healthier ecosystems, c) gradual proofs of profitable competitiveness in fair contexts linking internet ecarts through purchase reaggregation with big data pipes running transparent (or, less opaque, perhaps) systems with an ability to look up and contribute intellectual property to develop caveat emptor ecosystems analytics from an ethics (cynical) standpoint that can be abated or remediated, minimized or reduced by active discussion and contributions to diffusions and opportunities analysis by upticks and uptakes in ecart feed distributions and receivables handling. This is not your easily standardized run-of-the-mill fare, and getting the semantic cascade between competencies as vertical levers in managing journalism platforms among people whose expertise interconnects and is respected won’t be easy either; if the above can be done, it would result in a new paradigm for logistics and search/feed and events (which will require its own risk controls and fraud against risk manipulation), so I don’t think the chances are too good … but I think they are better than they have ever been before.
What you think?FACEBOOK ACCOUNT and TWITTER. Don't worry as I don't post stupid cat videos or what I eat!