Author Archives: BonnieG
// Posted by BonnieG on 06/11/2015 (6:17 PM)
// Posted by BonnieG on 06/04/2015 (6:28 PM)
During the inception of electronic trading, traders who worked for large corporations usually had at least four or more computers monitors on their desk. Why? So they could watch the American, and Foreign exchanges and to trade stocks at a… Read more
During the inception of electronic trading, traders who worked for large corporations usually had at least four or more computers monitors on their desk. Why? So they could watch the American, and Foreign exchanges and to trade stocks at a faster pace. The computers allowed brokers to watch the highs and lows of fortune 500 stocks in real time, and monitor financials/industry news. They didn’t waste time switching from different screens. For Traders speed is extremely important and electronic trading allowed for them more efficiency, and time management. It also put those traders who had faster servers, and more assets ahead of the game, when it came to placing orders with the exchanges.
As the article High-Frequency Trading: Networks of Wealth and the Concentration of Power, revealed, small investors had a difficult time trading instantaneously on the exchange; as, they didn’t have faster computers, and their assets were a lot smaller. Initially, the smaller investor had trading using a broker; which caused for delays if your broker’s firm didn’t have seat on the NYSE. For example, by the time the broker took the order from their client’s, entered it in the system, and then initiated the order with the exchange; the price had changed, thus putting limitations on taking, and placing orders on the open market. However, if your brokers firm had a seat on the exchange the electronic transfer was sent immediately to the floor of the NYSE.
(See Richmond Times Dispatch: Business section: The Stock Market at Work: 7/9/1995)
For me that sounds a bit unfair, and unregulated. In order to level the playing field for smaller investors, SOES was enacted by the NASDAQ which somewhat allowed smaller investors who were shut out from immediate carrying out of their buy/sell orders, via electronic trading. Nevertheless, even with SOES, the exploitation of electronic trading could not be prevented. Some traders, who had more efficient and faster computers, then the NASDAQ market makers, used them to buy and sell stock at a gain before the NASDAQ market makers changed their prices in the system.
Now with even faster trading methods, known as High Frequency Trading (HFT), electronic trading has become more radicalized, and impacted the world of securities trading in a major way. For example, the hours of the American exchanges: are from 9:00 am, and close at 4:00pm (Monday through Friday). But, now with online trading home computers and firms are now able to buy and sell stock after hours in any market, even on the weekends. From big businesses, to small investors their computers do the thinking by placing market, limit and stop orders. Sounds fair, but it’s not, because the hierarchy of the playing field didn’t change. You would think the determining factor on stock bids would be the price, but that is not true. Due to HFT, if all bidders are equal in price then whosevers order came in first will come before the successive bidders. Another radical factor about HFT is if bidding orders are equal in price, and arrival time, then the determining factor for the bid will be the size of the order. So, I ask whom do you feel has the capability of having faster servers and more assets; big corporations or smaller investors?
// Posted by BonnieG on 05/28/2015 (7:13 PM)
Unlike typical malware that pulls its data from computer’s hard drive, Stuxnet pulled the data from the memory, which virtually made if impossible to detect. As the article “How Digital Detectives Deciphered Stuxnet, The Most Menacing Malware In History.” pointed… Read more
Unlike typical malware that pulls its data from computer’s hard drive, Stuxnet pulled the data from the memory, which virtually made if impossible to detect. As the article “How Digital Detectives Deciphered Stuxnet, The Most Menacing Malware In History.” pointed out Stuxnet created a new “breed” of spyware. The malware was so malicious that it infected the software of several industrial sites in Iran, including a uranium plant. The worm spread from one computer to another through a LNK file of Windows Explorer. Unbeknownst, to the user, each time the USB stick was installed the worm installed an encrypted file onto the computer. This allowed the intruders to spy on Iran’s systems.
The worm caused cyber warfare, like battles played out in the military. First, the malware wreaked havoc on Microsoft Windows. Then it infected Siemens Step 7 software. The malware was so invasive that the worm would separate in many different directions. That made the detection even more difficult to discover. From what I gathered the malware flowed as such:
- First an infected USB sticks that contained the Stuxnet virus running Microsoft Windows is inserted.
- Then it targeted systems that ran Siemans.
- Stuxnet used the information on the network to filter information.
The malware was so unique and complicated that computer experts, and companies who spend millions of dollars, was unable to detect the virus, and after its detection was unable to immediately stop it. Therefore, if experts are unable to detect spyware using professional knowledge, and sophisticated software, what are the laymen like us to do? We install anti-virus and anti-spy software, hoping we are fully protected against viruses, and Trojan horses. We’re not. Certainly, it allows us some protection from malicious programmers, but it also gives us a false sense of security, as well. Because, in spite of continued warnings, about computer theft, we continue to put valuable information online; from pictures, and locations of our children, to personal account numbers.
It disturbs me, knowing if large companies that spend millions of dollars to detect, and stop malware, are unable to do so, where does that leave us? Certainly, we aren’t going to stop using the computer, because it has now become an integral tool in our lives.
// Posted by BonnieG on 05/27/2015 (9:13 PM)
First I would like to say, my blog reads from a different point to another discussion.
My thoughts regarding Snowden, and Greek mythology; I feel he used mythology as an educational source, and form of entertainment. He formatted… Read more
First I would like to say, my blog reads from a different point to another discussion.
My thoughts regarding Snowden, and Greek mythology; I feel he used mythology as an educational source, and form of entertainment. He formatted the information, and used it to remove himself from his own reality. Myths are about Gods, not mortals. Was life so off course that he had to use mythology as a relatable subject? Did he somehow view himself as a mystical anomaly? Also, he has the text book personality of an introvert. They enjoy thinking, exploring, thoughts and feelings, in addition, to reading, being alone, and working alone. I’m not trying to convey that by associating himself with fables and being an introvert alone caused him to expose the government. I’m stating because of those personality traits, they could be used as some of the reasons why he felt the need to expose governmental secrets, leave friends, and family behind, and hold up in a hotel like a recluse.
Speaking of exposure, our United States government has always infringed on the civil liberties of people in the U.S. in regard to domestic spying. The method used was just more dated. Remember, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, and his unauthorized phone wire taps, unlawful entries, and bugging rooms. During that period there was little oversight, and investigative reporting, and if there was, the public was either unconcerned, or the actions of the government were not questioned. However, due to someone leaking information to the press, his unlawful spying was exposed. So, as far as Snowden, exposing the NSA and their illegal tactics was of no surprise, for me.
See more history on wire taps
Third point during a Constitutional law class, that I took many years ago, we discussed freedom of speech. My professor at the time pointed out, that most of the phones in the U.S, are bugged by our government. He didn’t show us proof, nor reveal his source. He matter- of- fact, stated the U.S government listens in, on our phone calls. He told us if we didn’t believe him, while speaking on the phone say “I’m going to kill the President of the United States”. He said your life as you know it will slowly change. During class discussion, most of the students, including myself believed him. Later that evening while talking on the phone I wanted so to say those words, but I was afraid.
In addition, the Federal government is not the only entity listening, and tracking our every move, we now have social media. They like the government collects data, targets people, records, and uses our information for matters we have no control over, and like the government they have the capabilities to do it without our knowledge. So, I ask are the world’s biggest internet companies secretly in cohorts with the NSA? More importantly, can they be stopped?
Because of 911, added securities had to be added. I may not agree with the way Snowden handled the situation, however I do agree, with his belief that with added measures of security our civil liberties should not be taken away. For instance airport security, our 4th amendment right is being compromised by illegal search and seizures. Not doing anything at all innocent people are subjected to machine and body searchers in order to board a plane. Therefore, stating our freedoms are not absolute and that the government can enact restrictions on our rights based on actions of terrorism. However, I must ask when the risk it to protect the United States what are we willing to give up to protect given liberties?
Please see below my YouTube Video: Nude Awakening
My mother would always say to me “if you have nothing to hide than it shouldn’t concern you if I look in your room. Well, it wasn’t that I was hiding something; I just didn’t want her looking through my things without asking. My mother used an early form of mass surveillance to prove “my house my rules” I get the feeling, that the way our government uses mass surveillance they are implying to us “my house my rules” Which isn’t right.
// Posted by BonnieG on 05/21/2015 (5:42 PM)
Although the WELL’S makeup of its hardware, and software did not differ from other computers in the way it computed, and transferred information, the company’s model was still nonetheless, an ingenious concept. As the saying goes, “if it’s not broke… Read more
Although the WELL’S makeup of its hardware, and software did not differ from other computers in the way it computed, and transferred information, the company’s model was still nonetheless, an ingenious concept. As the saying goes, “if it’s not broke don’t fix it”. Brand relied on proven management strategies to build his empire by using a handful of former “counterculturalist, hackers, and journalist” (14); the same mind-set used when he helped to build the Whole Earth Software Catalog. For me, what separated WELL’s computer strategies from main-stream computer technology was that WELL’s, goal was to combine main-stream hierarchy, and counterculture into a new realm of digital communication. Thereby, creating a new form of communication for people, to come together, and discuss new and different ideas.
Another concept that stood out for me was some of the by-laws/standards of the company such as: “to be free, open-ended universe, self-governing, and the marketing to one sector of business users. In addition, to the concept of the Whole Earth brand being one with the universe. However, with those perceptions, I feel the WELL missed some important issues. First when people are involved comes with that is materialism, and as much as they tried to avoid a capitalist society, they couldn’t avoid capitalism. Because they soon realized nothing is free, thus, the users were charged a nominal fee for the use of the WELL. Also, when it came to copyrights, they cautioned themselves, as well, by transferring the liability onto their users. As a rule people need controls, and operating a business on lightheartedly standards, would be challenging, if serious controls are not in place. In addition, to that, a standard is established to provide rules, and guidelines for the characteristics of a company. And lastly how can a business survive by having just one marginal niche. Even though, some of the design goals made no sense to me, the WELL developed something their users wanted and that was a virtual community, for people to come together.
In addition, to that the WELL also added a unique value to the virtual community, because they tried to remove the reality from virtual reality, and go beyond from just developing a personal computer. As well, they attempted to remove the bureaucracy caused by universities, and government, and build a system that empowered a neutral community of democratic conscious believers. Because of the WELL’s initial unorthodox foundation their thought processes, and leadership was not completely about big business, or personal financial success.