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

SEC approves Texas Stock Exchange, first new US integrated exchange in decades

cbsnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 493 posts

Re: SEC approves Texas Stock Exchange, first new US integrated exchange in decades

#331

Post by CyberDildonics »

resters wrote: post #325
CyberDildonics wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

the better our discovery gets

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

Re: SEC approves Texas Stock Exchange, first new US integrated exchange in decades

#332

Post by tonyhart7 »

dreamcompiler wrote: post #245
tonyhart7 wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

in many country, electric(or energy) is state company that way any infrastructure that related to serve the citizen well being isn't exploited for profit why US can't do this????

The US did do this for most of the 20th century. Or at least something close to this: Many utilities were private companies but they were regulated monopolies. The state allowed them to be monopolies in exchange for tight state control. In the 1990s this started to change. The idea was that the different utilities could compete for customers, and thus they wouldn't be monopolies any more and thus market forces would…

Yeah, free market is great until some company is reach certain size and monopolies certain shares and forces to bend the market at will

and US citizen let them do it, how can't you vote the fck out of this is crazy

Re: SEC approves Texas Stock Exchange, first new US integrated exchange in decades

#333

Post by hn_acc1 »

Fade_Dance wrote: post #309
snowwrestler wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bit of an aside, but I really do not understand the concerns with trading speed. I can trade at human speed now: when I want to make a trade, I put in the order and it gets executed. Speed elsewhere in the market makes it easier , not harder, for me to trade when I want to. And I don’t care who my counterparty is; that’s a fundamental feature of a stock exchange. If A is always faster than B because A is 2 racks clos…

>How does that hurt me? Because lit orders get front run. Every sophisticated participant/algo is exceptionally efficient at extracting money from less sophisticated participants. As someone who trades decent volume but doesn't have a fully institutional grade workflow, I have the fortune of dealing with this... Simple lit orders (posting an order directly to an exchange) will be taking advantage of by both market ma…

I gotta say.. I'm way out of my depth on that one. As a guy who's mostly put some 401K $$ into index funds, and has the odd RSU/ESPP stock to sell - will any of these be an issue when I sell some of them later? I've only sold ESPP stock via "at this price" when I had a large enough number, and "at market" when not - but it's been in the hundreds of shares at most. May have a few thousand shares of my current employer's stock to sell next year - will this affect me?

Re: SEC approves Texas Stock Exchange, first new US integrated exchange in decades

#334

Post by WanderPanda »

Fade_Dance wrote: post #309
snowwrestler wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bit of an aside, but I really do not understand the concerns with trading speed. I can trade at human speed now: when I want to make a trade, I put in the order and it gets executed. Speed elsewhere in the market makes it easier , not harder, for me to trade when I want to. And I don’t care who my counterparty is; that’s a fundamental feature of a stock exchange. If A is always faster than B because A is 2 racks clos…

>How does that hurt me? Because lit orders get front run. Every sophisticated participant/algo is exceptionally efficient at extracting money from less sophisticated participants. As someone who trades decent volume but doesn't have a fully institutional grade workflow, I have the fortune of dealing with this... Simple lit orders (posting an order directly to an exchange) will be taking advantage of by both market ma…

Theoretically, when the market offers me an order book and I take offers on one or the other side that should be totally fair? I think until execution/fill the information should be totally between me and the exchange and no one else, right? I get that if I send a limit order that can not be filled, that that affects the market because new information is introduced (before the trade) but in the previously described case all the information going out should be after the trade already happened, right?

Re: SEC approves Texas Stock Exchange, first new US integrated exchange in decades

#335

Post by JumpCrisscross »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #329
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

Re: SEC approves Texas Stock Exchange, first new US integrated exchange in decades

#336

Post by resters »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #331
resters wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

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.

Re: SEC approves Texas Stock Exchange, first new US integrated exchange in decades

#337

Post by HolyLampshade »

paxys wrote: post #66
cozzyd wrote: post #10

Hope they have ample backup power

I doubt the exchange infrastructure will be physically located in Texas.

In fact, it won’t be. Which is why NYSE was so quick to rebrand NYSE Chicago as NYSE Texas when TXSE made the announcement they were launching in Equinix NY4 in Secaucus. The only real differentiator these guys would have had (outside of listings rules) would have been location, but they opted for the lower resistance of locating with all the other markets.

Re: SEC approves Texas Stock Exchange, first new US integrated exchange in decades

#338

Post by dang »

cramcgrab wrote: post #290
dang wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't make things even worse by posting bad comments yourself. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html Edit: your account has unfortunately been posting a lot of unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments (e.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45412687 and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45404646 ). Can you please stop doing that? It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for—we're…

Please moderate your techie site and reduce the amount of politics and preaching, or else you will wind up like Reddit, digg, and of course, the once famous Leo Laporte, who is now exclusively preaching his politics to his 100 faithful followers.

This question has a lot of history on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17014869. If you'll take a bit of time to learn about how we approach it, you'll find that the site is pretty stable: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so...

It does fluctuate—we can't be immune from macro trends (https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...). But the principles we apply have been the same for many years, and if you step far enough back, the amount of politics is pretty consistent.

Re: SEC approves Texas Stock Exchange, first new US integrated exchange in decades

#339

Post by PartiallyTyped »

smallmancontrov wrote: post #328
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps Texas could use a different trading model that doesn't require ultra high speed trading Wall Street (as in the sell side) is strongly incentivised to stamp out high-speed trading. It undercuts their dealer model. They have tried and failed to come up with an auction model that eliminates HFT without tradeoffs that real investors find unacceptable.

Didn't HFT compete itself out of outsized profitability years ago? So now we get instant super liquidity for pennies?

For stocks most likely, though I assume a lot of it today comes from options traders, where the spread is much wider.

Re: SEC approves Texas Stock Exchange, first new US integrated exchange in decades

#340

Post by sleepyguy »

dylan604 wrote: post #217
sleepyguy wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, Oncor isn’t great. They do just enough to keep the lights on for regular customers. But I’m pretty sure large data centers negotiate a higher level of service and purchase power at discounted rates. FB, for example, has a massive data center in the Alliance corridor — check out the link. Those trailer-sized units you see along the outside of the building are enormous diesel or natural gas generators — more than…

Each building has 2 large fuel tanks which is where I was expecting to see a fault in the plan. I wonder how redundant the fuel supply is. If building 1 is the only one on generator power and the fuel tanks start to run low, can they easily route more fuel from another building's tanks? Just how paranoid were they with the design?

When ever there is an extended power outage at a facility like this, tankers show up. I would not be surprised if there are contracts with Suncor distribution to have a steady flow of tankers supplying fuel to the facility. There are several fuel distribution hubs throughout the DFW area that supply the local markets including two major airports.
Post reply on HN