If you manage your own rack, all you are doing is uploading a strategy and letting it run, returning the executed trades to your own inhouse systems for booking.
If a third party provider (there are several which offer this service) manages the rack, router, host infra, and provides you with the virtual guest OS, or going one step further with the application into which you load the strategies, then it's much easier to "right size" the infrastructure you actually need.
As others have pointed out, the pain point is multicast into the VM. Drop a packet = you lose money.
All that said, some trading is going the other way, RFQ based flows with 30 second quote lifetime, which is perfectly suited to the cloud and it could well be the nature of what is traded moves away from volatility based products (options) to value driven (bonds, funds).
A few days ago on HN there was a short story of five paragraphs that started badly & finished OK, and I wondered if some operations research tricks could be applied. One is forward-backward-forward planning, this produces better schedules, and if applied would create a better opening, and perhaps ending (i.e. model is run three times).
In the case of citations, you really need a language model & a fact model. The language model then passes over to the fact model, then back to the language model. This means double(+) training.
I suppose the fact model could include things like Wolfram (also discussed on HN).
Definitely. 20 years ago when homes were not littered with LEDs all over, I would wake in the night to total blackness.
I could still find my way around the house just able to see based on what is I suppose a noise floor of ambient temperature.
Go into the kitchen & behold the stove top emitting 'bright' white light, from I suppose a temperature of around 30degC /90F.
Obviously everything is a blackbody, but those photons surely can't be 'single' visible ones.
Gosh. I used to have pretty good night vision and recognise what you mean about "see based on the noise floor" - but I never had an experience like seeing the stovetop heat. Remarkable. I wonder how much variation there is between people? Unfortunately mine's faded with age so I don't think it's worth my trying to see if I can see that myself now...
This is something the article doesn't mention, but we learnt in our early teens helping to fit wheel nuts, and of course they look better dome side up.
Loading is probably where I would start - we can take the 40ft container maximum load(capacity+container) as 29tons, divide by 8 to give 7250 lbs.
I discovered tires have 2 load ratings, 150/149 would mean 7400lbs in single configuration, 7150lbs in double. So there is a little inefficiency in concatenated configuration.
Google easily finds me 40' 4-axle trailer. Same company provides similarly 2-axles with the wheels doubled up.
Latin for Lawyers 2nd edition
seems to be based on E. Hilton Jackson ( a lawyer) & Broom's Legal Maxims
published 1937, sweet & maxwell
(Book was from ebay, unread condition)
Pasted inside front cover -
This book is a typical text excercise book from the years between the two world wars!
It is almost useless in imparting any understanding of the subject. Almost all books on any subject tended to be like this and students often had to battle to make sense of incomprehendible texts. Even with the help of of a tutor it is difficult to see how anyone could follow it.
Anyone trying to use it alone would entirely be lost and confused.
There is no account of how to use it, no help with following the numbering system, and above all no ANSWERS!
Even someone with a school grounding in Latin would have difficulty.
It is a fine example of the dry, pedantic and often unhelpful attitude of the time in the teaching profession where simple facts were often presented in an unnecessarily convoluted way, simply it seems because this was the academic fashion
This habit only died out after WWII
It has a parallel in the Victorian.habit of giving quite ordinary toys elaborate Greek names, such as the Phenakistoscope!
Think of SWIFT as a large Websphere MQ installation, distributed across several data-centers.
You get an IP access by installing a router, leasing telecoms connectivity.
You get access to publish/subscribe with an SSL certificate exchange.
You get access to send/receive to a specific node(Bank) with another SSL exchange.
It is important to realize nodes can only send messages to those addresses which have been trusted, i.e. keys exchanged.
So a bank (Bank-A) trusts you to send SWIFT messages, all you can do with these messages is make accounting debits & credits within that bank. e.g. please debit $100 from my account number 12345 to account 67890.
You can also chain the messages, something like, debit my account $100, credit the account of Bank-B, and send my message on to Bank-B.
The message to Bank-B might say (debit Bank-B and) credit John-Doe-account.
(It's the job of the treasury department within the bank to monitor & keep these nostro [other bank] accounts funded)
Perhaps not obvious, but banks don't have hundreds of correspondent accounts. So to send money from a small town bank in Peru, to another small town bank in Palau, there are going to be a lot of these back-to-back transactions. The pathways are determined by hardcoded rules - not by SWIFT - but by each bank in the chain.
So sanctioning SWIFT is one part. The other part is getting every bank on SWIFT to remove all correspondent banking rules going via Russia. (Quite nice work I suppose).
Since the messages themselves are just XML, and not partially large, you could easily put all the days messages which got rejected into a .zip & use email (I suspect this is common operationally anyway).
Any kind of sanction on SWIFT would instantly lead to private MQ (or whatever flavor of messaging) infrastructure springing up everywhere & total chaos for every bank in the world (i.e. quite different to Iran).
This would cause a reduction in the number of correspondent accounts each bank would be willing to maintain. So longer pathways, slower international payments.
I doubt SWIFT could recover from a sanction. It would just close down. The endgame being heterogeneous networks, poorer monitoring, so the USA lose.
The sanctions put on individual Russian banks can be monitored (by SWIFT). In likelihood they are not used as correspondent banks.
>How does the system guarantee that nobody's creating money without notifying everyone?
SWIFT doesn't do this. I suppose a special audit is triggered (see Wirecard ) and the Auditor should catch it.
If a third party provider (there are several which offer this service) manages the rack, router, host infra, and provides you with the virtual guest OS, or going one step further with the application into which you load the strategies, then it's much easier to "right size" the infrastructure you actually need.
As others have pointed out, the pain point is multicast into the VM. Drop a packet = you lose money.
All that said, some trading is going the other way, RFQ based flows with 30 second quote lifetime, which is perfectly suited to the cloud and it could well be the nature of what is traded moves away from volatility based products (options) to value driven (bonds, funds).