Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jdonaldson 259 days ago
The issue isn't that there's a lot of change coming from inside the markets, it's that there's a lot of change coming from outside the market, and it's all interconnected.
1 comments

In a millionth of a second? This a rationalization for something that is only being done because it can be done.
I think you are letting your "speculation is bad" bias interfere with your understanding of dynamical systems.
I think you're hallucinating something I didn't say to avoid confronting what I did say.

Also what's the difference between a system, a dynamic system and a 'dynamical' system?

The behavior of other participants is itself a first-class signal.

Rule 611 compresses that signal. By forcing everything to orbit a size-agnostic NBBO, it collapses a lot of the “behavioral bandwidth” (depth, imbalance, sweep patterns, replenishment, cancel/replace cadence) into a single top-of-book tick. Less resolution, less information.

High-resolution flow tells you who wants what, at what size, and how urgently. When we gate execution through protected quotes, we encourage tactics that flick the top-of-book with tiny size and discourage truthful size revelation. That’s signal destruction dressed up as protection.

Letting informed counterparties print away from the protected price (to reflect size or information) increases informational content. You get cleaner read-through from actual willingness to trade, instead of a compliance-driven dance around a fragile benchmark.

So yes: other people’s actions are the best data feed. The more of that behavior we can see—in size, time, and venue—the better our discovery gets. 611 reduces that visibility by design.

If HFT was genuinely good for the entire market than absolute latency would be what matters but it is only relative latency between HFT firms that matter because they are all competing against each other using the same tactics where whoever is fastest wins.
the better our discovery gets

The better the computers hooked directly into the exchange get you mean.

All participants contribute to price discovery. A nanosecond order book helps with price discovery the deeper it is, regardless of whether orders clear.

> The better the computers hooked directly into the exchange get you mean.

I think you're trolling with this one. But you had an advantage typing your comment into a web browser compared to all the people who wrote theirs on paper and put it in an envelope with a stamp.

> The better the computers hooked directly into the exchange get you mean.

I need you to understand that HFT makes decisions based on human-defined parameters. It's not AI-driven. What's the difference between a human saying "these are my parameters, now CPU, go trade based off those" versus "these are my parameters, now underling, go trade based off those"

the only difference is speed, plus i suppose those underlings might suck at following their boss's directives compared to a computer

It's pretty funny that there are people in this thread pretending like "price discovery" is a real thing that happens in markets based on information. We've all seen Dogecoin and BBBYQ. The emperor has no clothes.
We could make the distinction between price discovery, i.e. what price are people currently willing to buy and sell at (short-term) vs value discovery (long-term).
When I press the buy and sell button, I want the transaction to happen as quickly as possible. So does everyone else.

My millionth of a second is different than yours, and everyone else’s.

It is no different than buying or selling anything else. And there is no loss from the additional liquidity, you can easily set a limit at which you want to buy or sell.

> My millionth of a second is different than yours, and everyone else’s.

No it isn't.

> I want the transaction to happen as quickly as possible. So does everyone else.

Your monitor refresh is about 16,000 times slower so you aren't going to know.

The only reason you need something faster is because you think you have to compete with other people trading on microseconds.

If matches happened at 1 second intervals you wouldn't have to worry about it at all.

> If matches happened at 1 second intervals you wouldn't have to worry about it at all

This is nonsense. There is still advantage to submitting your trade as close to that settlement deadline as possible.

Not so much if the submitted prices are hidden until the matches are resolved.
> Not so much if the submitted prices are hidden until the matches are resolved

Except every other exchange is still revolving. The only way to implement this is to eliminate competition between exchanges.

Also, Wall Street would love this. The more of the order book you submitted, the more information you have about its composition.

>When I press the buy and sell button, I want the transaction to happen as quickly as possible. So does everyone else.

Nope, not me. I don't mind if it takes like 20 seconds or so.

> not me. I don't mind if it takes like 20 seconds or so

Which is fine! You can probably find a broker who will give you fee-free trading with that preference. The price you execute at won’t be as good. But unless you’re trading millions, that’s probably fine.