All would have been fine and well

 I've been doing this since '86. It wasn't really until 2008 and 2009 that we noticed the explosion of quotes, of price changes for stock, without an a panying explosion of actual trading. Normally, you'd see the price change once or twice a second -- now, a hundred times, or a thousand times. Just a little quick calculation on the calculator, and a knowledge of the speed of light, tells you, 'Hey, wait a minute, you guys are changing the prices faster than anyone can physically access them,New Released Mercedes Benz AK500+ Key Programmer with EIS SKC Calculator so why are you blasting that all over the country on the consolidated feed?"This is, in your view at least, the result of Regulation NMS issued in 2007 by the Securities and Exchange Commission.

With Reg NMS, it essentially took x amount of available stock at one place, and made it one tenth of that x at ten different places. The regulations, as they were written and they were understood, were that routing of orders for stock would all be based on what they called a SIP, a security information processor. The SIP would tell each exchange if there were a better price somewhere else. If so, the order had to route it to that other exchange, which guarantees you get the best price available on any of the exchanges. Where does the best price e from? It es from the SIP, also known as the consolidated feed. It's really what goes along the bottom of CNBC or financial sites.

All would have been fine and well, or at least, it would be a lot better than it is today, if they actually used the SIP. Instead, the exchanges created these direct feed connections, which is a way to get the prices faster, which is actually illegal under Reg NMS. That's the big issue I have. Reg NMS is very clear: exchanges can't give this market data to anyone else in any other way faster than they give it to the SIP.TOP3000 Universal Programmer High-frequency traders are taking advantage of the exchanges illegally giving them this data sooner. If anybody is going to get arrested or busted or fined over this, it probably won't be the high-frequency traders. It's going to be the exchanges. That's what the NYSE got fined $5 million for in 2012. The SIP is the core of that piece of regulation. Without the SIP, all of Reg NMS falls apart.

Getting back to Lewis's book

 It can be the same group of stocks that processed by the same puter. That's what quote stuffing is, and that still goes on today. That should just disappear, if they weren't doing these games any more, but they are. They're going to roll out this new laser technology that gets from Carteret to Mahwah in an obscenely small amount of time. It's getting on the low-microsecond range. There's a reason why they're willing to pay for that.This has not changed at all. They've just gotten more sophisticated at hiding it. Instead of doing it solid for a second, they'll do it ten times as much, but they'll do it in a tenth of a second, so that the exchanges, which measure traffic on a one second interval, won't see it. It will be invisible, but it has the same impact.

Getting back to Lewis's book, IEX just opened in December. They were still pushing Thor around a year ago.That book is not old at all. It is spot on the money.Your own pany, Nanex, in Winnetka, Ill.--when and why did you start it? How do you see your place in all of this as a critic of high-frequency trading?
Back in '86, I was collecting everything traded on the CME onto a floppy desk, and selling that historic data from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange via Bulletin Board System. That was the precursor to the Internet.How about that!We actually had cell phones back then. We even had a real-time system once. We were transmitting real time futures charts into your car you'd ride around, and on a laptop hooked up to your cell phone, you'd see real-time, streaming charts. I've been here since the beginning.People who know me know that I'm all about data. I'm very scientific about it.

 I'm not going to publish anything or say anything unless I'm 100 percent sure and I've verified that that's what it is. I'm a very quiet person. I am not one who -- I'm a programmer at heart. That's what I enjoy doing. It wasn't until the flash crash came along: May 6, 2010, at 14:42:44 is when it overloaded.We ended up processing over a billion quotes that day. It seemed to me the SEC was having trouble assembling data. We had it. My pany, we can replay any market day that we want. I made the fateful mistake of saying to one of my programmers out in California, 'Hey, let's see what we can do with our data.

The vagaries of English language

Wilcox: The vagaries of English language. We strive to recognize meaning, not just words. Plus, the depth of material you need to handle the long tail of all possible conversations that the user could initiate. We obviously can't handle everything, but we handle an awful lot. Here's an example of a prize-winning 15-minute conversation Angela had with a judge during the 2012 ChatbotBattles. Multi-Diag Access J2534 Pass-Thru Device It's an example of something which is "close" to great, with only minor flaws to reveal it's a chatbot.We use ChatScript, an open-source natural-language engine I wrote. It's the most powerful tool out there for creating conversational agents.What are the cues that I can use to know for sure that this conversation, which we're doing over instant-message, is with a human, and not with a chatbot?

Wilcox: You'd best ask things that puters are lousy at, like physical world inferencing. For example, "If I keep pouring coffee into my cup, what will happen to the book on the table near it?"PORSCHE PIWIS Tester Long sentences with plexity are also hard for determining meaning by puters.At the World Turing Test petition, a judge asked, "If I stab you with a towel, will it hurt?"And what was the answer?Wilcox: We weren't ready for it. You never can be. So we did something useless like quibbling.Are there specific challenges to creating AI aimed at children?Wilcox: Absolutely. First, voice-to-text is really hard with kids' voices. Second, childrens' vocabularies are limited and limiting.And third, as an adult you can't just write what you would easily write and say.

You have to scale it to a child's cognitive abilities. Angela wasn't so bad because she was an 18-year old voice, whereas, we're working with Geppetto Avatars on a children's health management app that's targeted for 6-year-olds, and it's been a real problem for us to think like a child and write for the child. The child's sense of humor is different from ours, and they love repetition.What is the World Turing Test petition like?Wilcox: It's a random mess. The qualifiers ask human knowledge questions like "which is bigger, a pine nut or a pine tree." And if Tom is taller than John who is taller than Sue, who is the shortest. The top four scores then get the human judges in petition, where they can do anything.

Runway Model And Tech Programmer

Now it's time for the latest conversation from our Women in Tech series. All this month, we're speaking to innovators in tech, and we're talking about the best ways to encourage young women to consider engineering, puter science and other tech fields as careers. Now not many of us think of tech as glamorous, but fashion model and programmer - yes, you heard me right - Lyndsey Scott, is defying the stereotypes. When she's not busy modeling for Calvin Klein, Prada and Louis Vuitton, Lyndsey Scott creates apps - two of which were recently picked by Apple. And despite having walked the runway for Victoria's Secret, she is still proud to call herself a nerd. And Lyndsey Scott is with us now. We e. Thanks so much for joining us.LYNDSEY SCOTT: Thanks for having me.

MARTIN: So which came first, the beauty part or the geek part?
SCOTT: I was probably called a geek way before I was called a beauty. I definitely wasn't a model when I was in school, but I never called myself a geek back then. It was more of a painful term than a plement, but now that people are using words like geek and nerd to describe me, as long as it means that I'm smart, I'm OK with it.MARTIN: You're going to fly your geek flag high now, right?SCOTT: Sure.MARTIN: So when did you discover your love of puter science and all those kind of related areas? Is it something that you grew up with? Is it something that you kind of discovered just by kind of noodling around?SCOTT: I first started playing around with puter programming when I was in middle school.

I was given a TI 89 graphing calculator. I started looking through the documentation, and realized I could make games on my calculator. So I didn't see it as puter programming at all at the time, just as a way for me to have fun games to play with.MARTIN: We've spoke to a lot of women and girls in tech fields, and a lot of them say that they started kind of getting messages surprisingly early on that tech wasn't supposed to be for girls. I mean, that they weren't supposed to be in it. Did you ever feel that way?SCOTT: No not at all. Programming wasn't something that I was deterred from at all. In fact, my father was a puter programmer when it was in zeros and ones. Right now - nowadays he types with one finger at a time on a puter, but he was involved with puter programming himself.