How I made $500k with machine learning and high frequency trading

Re:How I made $500k with machine learning and high frequency... by marvin on Tuesday November 06, 2012 @01:50PM (#4749871)

This is a very mean and unconstructive comment to someone who made the impressive achievement of building his own automated trading system and actually making money from it. I've started calling out comments like this one, because they cause a bad environment for useful discussion.

The only argument in your comment that isn't your own unfounded opinion is that market makers make money from people who execute trades. But this is true by definition.

The traders who "gleefully picked off all those trades" weren't outsmarting anyone, they were simply profiting from the difference in the asking and offering price in the market. This is the role of a market maker, and actually makes it cheaper for people like OP to execute a large number of trades. So even though this comment sounds like a sensible rebuttal of the linked article, it doesn't really say anything at all.

Again, sorry for creating a negative reply and contributing to a bad tone, but I really the right thing is to call out these kinds of replies. They discourage honest sharing and discussion.

yajoe's comment is an example of how to criticize a post like this in a useful way. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4748989

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How I made $500k with machine learning and high frequency... by KingMob on Tuesday November 06, 2012 @04:49PM (#4750989)

While writing his own trading system is a decent accomplishment, due to things such as an overall rising market in the time period involved and survivorship bias, the original author is likely to be completely mistaken about the reason for his winnings.

Given that he might convince other people to engage in high tech gambling in a less-favorable market than the one he operated in, strong words are called for in this case.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:How I made $500k with machine learning and high frequency... by marvin on Tuesday November 06, 2012 @05:15PM (#4751120)

You could argue this, but in that case your arguments have to hold water and not just be a cursory dismissal. Ref. yajoe's much more thorough reasoning.

[ Parent | on HN ]