> > Try again. > > How about we just skip this part and get to the part where you say > what you were thinking of?
Good idea, they are, I am afraid, only la-la regulations against OCO orders. Yet, just for the sake of the argument, let us imagine that there were actual regulations against OCO orders. I am no fan of regulations; however, the resolution of a long-standing mathematical problem and its associated $1M prize held immobilized by red tape? That would be unbelievably outrageous and disappointing! On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 7:26 PM Raul Miller <rauldmil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2019 at 6:24 PM Jose Mario Quintana > <jose.mario.quint...@gmail.com> wrote: > > No, that rules against a dealer canceling a customer's *executed* order (except > > under certain circumstances); nowhere there is anything prohibiting > > "OCO" (contingent) > > orders. > > > > Try again. > > How about we just skip this part and get to the part where you say > what you were thinking of? > > > After nearly a decade since the initial publication... Nada (except in > > Lala Land). > > Lala Land is a fairly succinct description of the mathematical basis > for the various EMH hypotheses. > > That said, for a variety of reasons, it also serves as a rough > heuristic which can be useful in understanding a variety of decisions > over the years. > > Thanks, > > -- > Raul > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
