News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Jane Street barred from Indian markets as regulator freezes $566 million. Parent comment

Re:Jane Street barred from Indian markets as regulator freez... by dyauspitr on Sunday July 06, 2025 @05:45PM (#44484359)
One rotten regulator doesn’t mean you get to view the entire Indian regulatory environment as unreliable though. It’s the 4th/5th largest financial market in the world.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Jane Street barred from Indian markets as regulator freez... by Den_VR on Sunday July 06, 2025 @06:03PM (#44484496)
Is SEBI not the key regulator in this area?

To say it plainly, SEBI has been exposed for their selective enforcement on high-profile entities. If Jane Street’s in trouble with SEBI then it’s only because they failed to secure the same privileges as Adani, or Karvy, or Ramkrishna, or Sapre, or Kamath.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Jane Street barred from Indian markets as regulator freez... by fastball on Sunday July 06, 2025 @09:02PM (#44485675)
Does the size of a market have some positive impact on the reliability of its regulatory body that I am not aware of?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Jane Street barred from Indian markets as regulator freez... by dyauspitr on Monday July 07, 2025 @02:03AM (#44487209)
Yes, trust. Fully gamed systems will not have large willing participants.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Jane Street barred from Indian markets as regulator freez... by fastball on Monday July 07, 2025 @02:05AM (#44487216)
A market being large doesn't mean it has large participants.

But even then (and as seems to be the case in this instance), the market might have large participants because they are the ones doing the gaming, and are therefore happy to participate (even if trust is low).

[ Parent | on HN ]