[lotsofpulp]

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.

[CyberDildonics]

> 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.

[JumpCrisscross]

> 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.

[CyberDildonics]

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

[JumpCrisscross]

> 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.

[CyberDildonics]

The only way to implement this is to eliminate competition between exchanges.

There are two different things being talked about here.

Trading based on arbitrage between exchanges will happen in one way or another no matter what.

Trading millions of times per second automatically on the same exchange when some people have low latency computers at the exchange with huge amounts of extra information is not necessary.

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

The point isn't to make something 'wall street hates' it's to make something that doesn't get money eaten away by automated computers in the middle so that it's the best option for people making trading decisions on people time scales.

[KPGv2]

> The point isn't to make something 'wall street hates' it's to make something that doesn't get money eaten away by automated computers in the middle so that it's the best option for people making trading decisions on people time scales.

Why is this desirable? It seems like an argument designed only to serve the interests of a small class of person who insists on doing manual trades themselves.

The rest of what you've written just sounds like "I lost money because computers are better than me at the task." I'm not sympathetic to that concern. Computers are better than me at lots of things, so I just don't try to compete at those things. I pay people with access to the computers to do them for me, and then I focus on the things I'm good at instead. Division of labor and all that.

[JumpCrisscross]

> point isn't to make something 'wall street hates' it's to make something that doesn't get money eaten away by automated computers

Wall Street lobbies to ban HFT because HFT’s computers eat away less than traditional dealers would.

Retail investors railing against HFTs are sort of like those San Francisco types who protest new development to the benefit of their landlords.

[cool_dude85]

>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.

[JumpCrisscross]

> 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.