That's not true. When Robinhood (or any other retail broker) sends orders to a 3rd party to be filled, there is no way for that 3rd party to see who is sending the order other than it's coming from Robinhood. Robinhood maintains their own book customer orders; the FIX protocol that the orders are coded in doesn't even support that kind of granular info.
There are valid criticisms of payment for order flow but privacy isn't one of them.
Pretty sure they were banned for taking on a public political stance supporting disinformation peddlers like Alex Jones. Payment processers don't want to be associated with this kind of content for obvious reasons.
I completely agree with the statement 'not all conservatives are Nazis.' Just the people who show up at white nationalist rallies and decide to go with the mob. Why can't conservationism be about cutting taxes again? The repubs have a serious image problem turning a blind eye to this insane fringe and if they want to fix it they need to stomp it out and focus on economics or something less divisive.
Wow, I didn't know people were still talking about gamergate like it was a controversy worth caring about. And what does it have to do with legitimate conservative causes? You're as bad as the president. "Not all the white men carrying torches and chanting 'Jews will not replace us' are bad people"
Market makers put lots of quotes (orders) out on the various exchanges hoping to buy low and sell high, collecting the spread between the two. These days spreads are very small so market makers have to rely on automated quoting in order to make a profit. A side effect of this is that when markets are moving quickly the algorithms tend to take a conservative approach so the firm doesn't end up extremely long or short in a position. So when someone comes in and tries to buy up all the open orders at once they'll cancel their orders on other exchanges that haven't been executed yet so they can reprice to reflect the increased demand. The phantom liquidity really isn't much of a mystery when you look at it this way.
I don't follow at all. You're blaming balkanization on integration? Sure, white flight was an unintended consequence but that surely wasn't the goal and no fault of the policy itself. And how is this connected to gangs? Gangs can't exist in segregated schools how?
Level3 is dropping packets because $BIG_CABLE_ISP doesn't want to upgrade their cross-connects at the exchange points. Level3 sounds happy to increase this capacity, they are saying that the cable ISPs aren't negotiating with them to provide more bandwidth at these choke points. It's not Level3's job to pay for $BIG_CABLE_ISP's infrastructure, when it's their own customers who are requesting the traffic over these links.
If a customer is paying for an internet connection, they are paying for access the full internet, to the best of their ISP's abilities. This is the net neutrality law we need: ISPs should be compelled to upgrade their backbone links as they become congested, to satisfy their customer's demand. Congestion can be easily monitored and often these peerings are "free". (Yes there is a non-zero cost to increase switch and router capacity and to have someone plug the cables in, but it's not like Level3 is charging for the bits exchanged.) But the point is, since most ISPs are de-facto monopolies in this country, we need rules telling them they have to upgrade their capacity to meet their customers demand, if they are promising broadband speeds.