Read this https://blog.coinbase.com/coinbase-institutional-deea317d23a...
Right now, the institutions have to play on a level playing field with us one-man teams.
This suite of products will give them their pay-to-win advantages to keep us little guys from being the fastest and best in the market.
I have the fastest bot on GDAX right now, that will only last until these new services are introduced -- since I can't afford to pay $XXk a month for the privilege.
Edit: If you're reading this from your chair at a HFT firm, send me a message if your company is interested in the fastest bot :)
What are you basing your claim off of, I've seen some pretty impressive use of C++ and one team that is starting to burn simple strategies into FPGA's.
What sort of time from network stack to network stack are you consistently getting? ie time from when your network card receives a message until when your network card gets your reply?
That's a standard HFT measurement.
What does low latency buy you in crypto trading? What sort of strategies are people running that requires low latency?
 Source: Stefan Qin, Virgil Capital founder on CNBC - https://www.cnbc.com/video/2018/02/27/one-hedge-fund-manager...
I'm tracking order positions with an in memory orderbook. When gdax accepts my order I know where I end up. I average spot 1.45 when the spread changes. It's hard to get closer to perfect 1.00 because of limit taker orders which, if placed right, always get 1.00 after the taker portion is calculated and the maker is placed 1 cent from other other side.
Yes, but you still didn't address the question of what are you basing your claim of being the fastest off of.
Either one should either generate the capital you need, get your system bought by a big player, or get you hired with a big salary by a big player.
Let us know how it turns out!
I'm interested in talking with you
Registered securities (stocks, bonds, mutual funds, etc.) are widely available to non-wealthy people and are probably a better investment for most of them, frankly, because of the concentration of risk inherent in a small dollar portfolio of non-registered securities and the idea that registered securities will have some standardized reporting requirements and that one could rely on the market to do a certain amount of due diligence and price discovery.
Anyway, this distinction doesn't change my point: offers of such securities to unaccredited investors are not categorically "scams". This kind of critical reductionism is reckless to individual rights and liberty.
The expense comes from meeting the requirements to be registered on a large exchange like NYSE or NASDAQ (both of which are non-governmental entities). This is why small companies that have public stock are traded on "penny" exchanges.
In any case, I don't see any mom and pop shops offering their customers stock. There are only 10,000 companies with stock on the OTC market, out of 30 million in the US.
>>Yes, it does put some limits on individual freedom but I think this is one area where the trade-offs has been chosen decently well.
This is Big Brother ideology. No one in a free society should have their freedom restricted.
The practical results of this paternalism have been disastrous too, so it can't be justified on consequentialist grounds. Practically all small businesses are denied direct access to public capital markets atm.
That's probably trillions in lost economic gains and potentially a massive contributor to income inequality.
When you create gatekeepers, and prohibit anyone from transacting without their intermediation, you create a concentrated power structure that inhibits economic development and exacerbates income inequality.
The new crowdfunding rules are a tiny step in reversing this dire situation, but the real solution is to stop treating the adult population like children that need to be protected from their own bad judgment.
For the HN demographic that doesn't own a house and "only" pays rent, I'd agree with you. But another portion of the HN demographic that does own a flat or property may not qualify, as the definition of an accredited investor (at least in the US) is $1M+ USD of investible assets excluding their primary residence.
a natural person with income exceeding $200,000 in each of the two most recent years or joint income with a spouse exceeding $300,000 for those years and a reasonable expectation of the same income level in the current year
In fact Hudson River Trading is in bed with Blockstream:
Very sad to witness.
Not at hft but also ran a fast bot.
I'm interested in talking with you
I'm currently running a bot on GDAX
I once made 30k from 400$. It's ridiculous. I bought 400$ worth of BTC a year or two ago. BTC price went up. At that point I had ~3000$. I sold BTC and bought IOTA. IOTA was pumped, I sold it for $10,000. I went all in and bought Ripple at 0.94$. They pumped the price, I was able to sell at 3$, making a whopping $30k+.
Do you trade full time?
(I'm not the show host, I just enjoy the show)
Surely they load balance across AZs though so results may change...
You can distribute the nodes all you want, as long as the currency can be traded on a financial swap system, it will be nothing more than another commodity.
Wash trading did nothing wrong.
So I'm wondering why you would ask such a question?
I personally discovered this after a time sensitive transaction took about 48 hours to complete because of a buggy deploy on their end. The only reason it didn't take longer was because I was able to track down a coinbase support employee on the bitcoin reddit.
I ended up making a couple bucks off the deal. But I can't help but think how badly it could have gone.
They are getting lower latency, secure storage and new trading products -- only available to Institutions.
> Over the course of the year we intend to offer lending and margin financing products to qualified clients, high touch and low touch execution services like over-the-counter (OTC) trading and algorithmic orders, and new market data and research products
In all seriousness, the attention from institutions, growing maturity of custodial solutions and good monetary policy are colliding. Nocoiners, watch out!