balbeit

I think you may be mistaken. High-frequency trading is becoming less profitable as an industry, but algorithmic trading in general is most definitely not.

Did you read the article? It discusses the lack of 4G/LTE support for two full paragraph at the beginning...

"It’s as close to perfect as I’ve seen any Android smartphone get. But the Nexus 4 falls just short of perfection due to one major omission: It’s not compatible with any LTE networks... The lack of LTE connectivity will spoil the Nexus 4 for some. But if you don’t mind living without LTE — and you likely currently are, given AT&T and Sprint’s small LTE footprint, and the fact T-Mobile has yet to begin building its LTE network — then the Nexus 4 is a good buy."

Can you explain that situation? As I read it, it goes like this. Someone is willing to buy at $1.50, and someone is willing to sell at $1.60. If an investor comes along that wants to buy right now, he has to buy from the seller at $1.60. But say a HFT quickly throws out a sell order at $1.59, so the investor is now able to buy at $1.59 from the HFT. The investor saved $0.01, and the HFT made a trade he must have wanted. Where is the money being skimmed?

I would wager that it is because when creating named variables, people tend to start with the low integers, like var1, var2, etc... And when using constants, they will often use maximums up to a threshold, like 999.99. So the middle range (5-8) is rarely used.

Actually, the WSJ is correct. Helium has a lower density than air, while a head has a higher density. Hence, they will move in opposite directions.

From a shareholder's perspective, does this mean Barnes & Noble is now, in essence, an e-book reader manufacturer/distributor with a retail presence? And the retail presence just happens to be doing terribly at everything except selling the Nook?

I'm trying to wrap my head around what exactly this means for Barnes & Noble. Any insight would be appreciated!

FTA: Facebook "paid 23 million shares at $30.89 a share plus $300 million cash for Instagram for a total of $1,010,470,000."

But by having people click on those ads, the companies that are advertising (which could be and are companies actively engaged in "physical" products) are acquiring paying customers and thus have greater ability to fund their products.

SpaceX, Boeing, GM, and Victoria Secret need revenue sources to create their 'non-virtual-reality' products, and marketing/advertising creates a revenue source. If they had a net loss from advertising they simply wouldn't do it.

This is the first iteration of my first-ever released project, done over the last week. It allows you to sync your mobile browser to your desktop browser. I hope to expand the product and overall make it easier for people to switch working from their desktop to their mobile phone, and vice-versa.

Technology: Node.js server running on Heroku, connected to a Redis database.

I would appreciate any suggestions, criticism, or improvements!

There are a couple other great apps that do something similar:

  http://trns.fr - uses text messages instead of email / mobile bookmarks
  http://AirLinkApp.com - one-time bookmarklet generation

This isn't Google.

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5084900/how-can-i-reserve...

I always love learning little tidbits about Python like these. Thanks!

Another I found quite useful: instead of collections.defaultdict, you can use the dict's get() method to set a default value if the key doesn't exist. get() takes the key and a default value, and if the key doesn't exist it creates one with the default value provided.

  a = {}
  a['foo'] = a.get('foo',0) + 1
  # a = {'foo':1}
  a['foo'] = a.get('foo',0) + 1
  # a = {'foo':2}

It can be very useful for incrementing keys in a dict, even if they did not exist previously.