> Literally anyone. Literally any other market participant with interest in longterm ownership.

You don't know what you're talking about. If there were no market makers, your orders probably wouldn't execute within any reasonable time frame.

> That's not my argument. Snakes bite. Highly profitable, speculative, and complicated US financial firms have consistently grown to threaten the stability of US financial systems before collapsing. Precedent matters. When an assertion violates a precedent, it's what must be proven. Your assertion has the burden of proof, and it's an incredibly high one at that.

That is your argument. Snakes bite? So, therefore, what? Financial companies commit fraud as their primary form of operation? What kind of argument is that? It's ludicrous.

> complicated US financial firms have consistently grown to threaten the stability of US financial systems before collapsing

I cannot emphasize this enough. You literally have zero idea what HFT firms actually do day-to-day. Many people use the word literally when they mean figuratively. I actually mean literally in this case. Comparing HFT firms to banks selling mortgage-backed securities is like comparing your local florist to a drug cartel. In fact, it's probably more like comparing a piece of wood to drug cartel. They're entirely different things. HFT firms don't even sell anything.

> Precedent matters. When an assertion violates a precedent, it's what must be proven.

The precedent you name is totally irrelevant. It's like saying since drug cartels do illegal things (they do), then this piece of wood lying on the ground in the forest is also breaking the law by existing. That's how disconnected the two things you're comparing are, but, again, since you literally have no clue what HFT firms do, you don't even understand that.

> Your assertion has the burden of proof, and it's an incredibly high one at that.

Wrong. You can claim that, but like all of your other claims, it's entirely false.

> Medallion is one of the most well regarded and profitable hedge funds in modern American history. It's a grandfather to modern HFTs. Even its sterling record is highly suspect.

I truly don't think you're even reading what I'm writing, or if you do, you keep moving the goalposts (not that it helps your case--you're still 100% wrong regardless of how much further you try to move it). HFT firms are not hedge funds. Stop comparing them to hedge funds, unless you think comparing a piece of a wood to a drug cartel is a useful comparison, in which case there's no point in talking anymore.

Also, "The Medallion fund [...] is a grandfather to modern HFTs" is such a vague and meaningless statement. Sure they have some algorithms, but lots of investment firms do. So what?

But if we follow this absurd line of reasoning, if your grandfather committed a crime (which even in this analogy, they didn't), does that mean that their grandchildren do also? Of course not.

> Smart people need to spend their time on engineering, medicine, and research. The amount of human capital wasted on silly little financial machinations these days sickens me. I go back and read about financiers jumping from building back in the 20s and I understand it completely.

This is a totally reasonable opinion, but entirely divorced from the question of whether or not HFT commits fraud. Again you have provided literally (not figuratively, but literally) zero evidence to back up your claim.

Your entire argument seems to be:

- Some financial firms have done bad stuff in the past

- HFTs are financial firms (sort of, but whatever)

- Therefore HFTs must be committing fraud

That's literally your argument as far as I can parse it. If you read that, that's just so patently absurd that I don't think I can do anything more to highlight how absurd it is. Its absurdity stands on its own. Maybe something like:

- Some people have committed crimes in the past

- You're a person

- Therefore you're a criminal