Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NYSE Tuesday opening mayhem traced to a staffer who left a backup system running

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 233 posts

Re: NYSE Tuesday opening mayhem traced to a staffer who left a backup system running

#41

Post by krapp »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #33
WJW wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some submarine operations are deliberately not automated, because if eg a sensor is broken or miscalibrated it could sink the entire boat if a computer very rapidly acts on the wrong information. Rather they do those operations with one person operating the valve/machine/device/etc, another watching and confirming readings, and the whole thing is on a constant audio link with a third person in an engineering room who…

This is now my headcanon explanation for why starships in Star Trek still require large crews (or crews in general).

On the one hand, given how often sensors fail and AIs flip the evil bit in Star Trek, limiting automation is probably a good idea.

On the other hand, the Enterprise won't even warn anyone when command staff are injured, cloned, mind-controlled or vanish from the ship altogether unless a human asks the computer where a specific person is first.

Of course there are Doylist reasons for all of this but I do like the premise of a general fear of AI and possible weird space BS being a factor.

Re: NYSE Tuesday opening mayhem traced to a staffer who left a backup system running

#42

Post by pcl »

itronitron wrote: post #37
WiSaGaN wrote: post #11

A lot of stocks have minute bar of wide range prices in the first few minutes of continuous trading. This seems like the incident in what caused Knight Capital fiasco, in which the system repeatedly buy on the ask and sell on the bid very fast, thus pushing the high price high and low price low. In the opening usually the market maker will be more weary of the risk they cannot hedge directly and thus will be less wil…

Doesn't each trade require both a buyer and a seller, who buy and sell at an agreed on price? Presumably both parties would be satisfied with the trade so it isn't clear to me what all the fuss is about.

Market price trades are executed at whatever the current price is. Presumably it’s those trades that caused havoc.

Re: NYSE Tuesday opening mayhem traced to a staffer who left a backup system running

#43

Post by parsimo2010 »

lotsofspots wrote: post #38
thisarticle wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The days of management taking responsibility for anything are over. See: not a single CEO stepping down for over hiring.

Oh, they take full responsibility, it always says so in the mails they send out. It's just that taking responsibility doesn't appear to actually result in anything happening.

A cyncical take might be that they are saying that they take responsibility (credit) for reducing the monthly payroll expenses. They may also have overhired in the past, but what's in the past was already paid for. The savings next month is how they justify a large paycheck.

Re: NYSE Tuesday opening mayhem traced to a staffer who left a backup system running

#44

Post by MrYellowP »

WJW wrote: post #29
bongobingo1 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The great thing about automation is the breadth, depth and speed at which I can propagate mistakes.

Some submarine operations are deliberately not automated, because if eg a sensor is broken or miscalibrated it could sink the entire boat if a computer very rapidly acts on the wrong information. Rather they do those operations with one person operating the valve/machine/device/etc, another watching and confirming readings, and the whole thing is on a constant audio link with a third person in an engineering room who…

> It's clearly not optimized for efficient use of personnel

I disagree. When the sub sinks, all these people die. That's far more inefficient use of personnel.

It feelf like you're putting more emphasis on the material cost ("the cost ... can be very large indeed") than on what actually matters.

Re: NYSE Tuesday opening mayhem traced to a staffer who left a backup system running

#45

Post by shapefrog »

lotsofspots wrote: post #38
thisarticle wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The days of management taking responsibility for anything are over. See: not a single CEO stepping down for over hiring.

Oh, they take full responsibility, it always says so in the mails they send out. It's just that taking responsibility doesn't appear to actually result in anything happening.

Macroeconomic changes have made it impossible for me to want to pay you

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34515267

Re: NYSE Tuesday opening mayhem traced to a staffer who left a backup system running

#47

Post by cc81 »

thisarticle wrote: post #32
wrldos wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. If an individual's mistake can take out your business you have a process control problem and that is owned by management.

The days of management taking responsibility for anything are over. See: not a single CEO stepping down for over hiring.

They only take responsibility for the profit margins. Over hiring affects those but often not significant enough and can be corrected with layoffs.

Re: NYSE Tuesday opening mayhem traced to a staffer who left a backup system running

#50

Post by NoboruWataya »

mellosouls wrote: post #22

These "issue traced to staffer" stories sound like management cover up for management/system shortcomings to me. Systems with such significant potential impact, and in industries where lack of financial investment in their continuity is a deliberate choice have very little excuse to be passing the buck to grunts for basic process flaws that can be triggered by individual error.

They're not mutually exclusive. A staffer leaving a backup system running may well have been the proximate cause of the issue but, if true, it was also likely a management/system issue as you say. The article is a bit strange in that it doesn't attribute the fact in the headline to any source. I don't see anything from the NYSE saying "it's all that guy's fault". On the contrary it says:

> [NYSE execs] plan to examine the platform’s procedures and management, potentially reworking rules to be more flexible and provide further protections.

Sounds like they know it's a management issue. The headline probably focuses on the staffer leaving the backup system running simply because it's a better headline.

Post reply on HN