Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by semilattice 1092 days ago
>You're almost saying capitalism and efficient markets are pointless. Maybe they are, but I think it's nothing like crypto.

People are saying this because, HFT sounds similar to 'crypto mining'. That's people with best infrastructure, the 'big-guys' -- win. While leaving out the retail investors as broiler chicken, pumped with 'drugs' (by influencers) to spend more on imaginary assets, so that they can be used for 'food' by these 'big-guys'.

There are different influencers for retail investors vs crypto. In retail investing there are promises of 'retirement paradise', actual tax deductions, the Jim Cramer-like people (at least what I heard in US)

For crypto investing the influencer are different, the geography is wider. A promise to participate in markets if you do not live the country that has adopted US/UK-based financial services.

- - - By the way, I think the markets will still have liquidity if there is a rule to wait, for say, 30 min before a stock that was just recently bought -- can be sold (unless by a clear fat finger mistake)

This rule will cause the HFTs to stop existing in the current form.

1 comments

So are retail investors truly no different from the people gambling their money on the lottery at the 7/11 every night?

Do any regular pedestrian middle class retail investors EVER actually earn enough to retire on? Or do anything meaningful with? If so.. what is THEIR secret sauce, since it's not HFT...

There are probably 3 classes of Retail investors

a)Members of political elite that get insider trading stock tips. (illegal of course). The number of folks in usa congress and senate that become 'very lucky' investors after they join the rank, has to be amazing

b)Lucky

c) everybody else -- that looses.

Overtime, I would say last 30 years, the amount of 'influencing' retail investors to trap them into unreasonable actions had gradually increased.

So the percentage of folks going becoming the victims of the charade, will become higher.

Certainly if you concentrate on ( b ) you create the plausible deniability defense for the manipulators