I've been using Sierra Chart since 2007/2008. From price to performance it's the best platform i've ever used. I've never had an issue with their support, but I can understand why some would.
In regards to these posts...they have shared their opinions on some subjects and offered up reasons/references for those opinions. They've been posted as 'offtopic' & not promoted. For me, I'd best describe it as quirky.
Compare that to the Expensify CEO who emailed 10 million customers, telling them who to vote for. To me, that's offensive.
I feel strongly enough about the Sierra Chart crew & their product to throw in my support. I'll likely be using Sierra Chart for the duration of my trading career.
The following 4 users say Thank You to chiebert for this post:
I'll happily support Anthony's right to post whatever conspiracy theory he likes.
And to have a go at my brokers and feeds (IB, AMP, CQG). As long as he keeps delivering a great platform, the rest is icing on a cake which I don't have to eat if I don't wish.
One tiny disagreement is that, IMO, the truth is not something that is "somewhere in the middle". Opinions often are, even mine, and some "truths" might be but the view that truth is in the middle and that both sides must be given airtime, no matter how hate filled or stupid they might be is dangerous. Just like trading, we should seek to get as close to testable truth as we can.
Science and Falsifiability rule - just ask any court about the importance of evidence.
The following 4 users say Thank You to kiwi for this post:
I just got started with Sierra Chart right before this stuff was posted on their site.
I don't want to pick any political side, I think I just want to share an unbiased part of my experience so far.
Their documentation and instructions for getting started with the platform, setting up Denali Exchange Data Feed and the Sierra Chart Order-Routing Service were terrific, every step was lock-step perfect and there was no ambiguity in my opinion.
When I set up the Order-Routing service, they needed to link my trading account to my SC account. Their support personnel created a ticket and asked me how the Order-Routing service was in the ticket messaging and I gave them very detailed feedback. It has been flawless in my opinion and I shared that opinion, and details about what I liked about it as compared to what I'd experienced with my previous platform.
Their support personnel were very kind and thankful and expressed their appreciation and gave details on how it helped their engineering team. I thought they went well above and beyond my expectations. Mind you, I didn't come to them with a problem, so this was a pretty routine process in getting started, but nonetheless in the past I thought Tastyworks had nice support and Sierra Chart's support was a level above even that I thought.
When I found out about the initial post in question, I read it and was amazed by the thought that SC had somehow built an entire team of software engineers, support, etc. who were unanimously cool with name-dropping Alex Jones, and all the conspiracy theory stuff. Knowing software engineers that I've worked with from all walks of life, in most general terms many of us seem to be a little head-strong, stubborn, a bit cynical and not cool with our employers posting political stuff usually. I initially wondered if I've been living in a tiny bubble. But that seems kind of like a weird probabilistic anomaly. Having been through quite a few software-engineering interviews I wondered how that interview process might go there. That seemed like an odd coincidence and it makes me wonder if they really are all on the same page or if there is some strife about these posts. I don't know.
I think I share @bobwest's opinion here, I don't need to get involved with their political posts. I am not sure if that is being insensitive, I think freedom of speech matters, but I also think there's some harm that can result from misinformation being spread. I am not always quite sure what is truth and what is misinformation these days. It does bother me like I said its strange that everyone there is on-board with these posts, that seems a bit off. But they have been kind and thoughtful in their direct interactions with me. It all adds up to a bit of confusion I guess.
The following 7 users say Thank You to snax for this post:
My view is that the world is not as clear, simple and black and white as we would like it to be. So we have people who mesh with us very well in some ways, and don't fit well with us in others.
I think we just have to value them where we can, be tolerant of them and hope they will be tolerant of us, and take the good stuff and don't get over-involved with the bad. You know, get along.
I am sorry the world has gotten as it has, where every difference of opinion is magnified into a cause for conflict, almost to the point of unyielding, eternal ideological war. I do not think that we as a species have to live this way, and I do not think this will last.
I do have my own views on the matters that are in these posts, and I don't think it will do any good for me to push them out here. Also, why would anyone care? The internet has made us all a bunch of egotists who think we have to use the megaphone it gives us proclaim our opinions, as if the world breathlessly needs to know them. (It doesn't.)
So, I take what I can of value from people who are offering something, as SC is, at least to me, and I shrug when I can at the times when they go off the deep end as I see it.
@kiwi wrote that the truth is not necessarily somewhere in the middle, and I completely agree. It is not the case that both sides are always right, nor that both sides are the same or are equally wrong. I'm just not going to make a disagreement I have in one area dominate everything. I have friends who have their weird views, and I shrug at theirs and they shrug at mine (even though I "know" they are wrong. ) This forum has a lot of people who disagree on many things outside the scope of the forum, but who get along very well within our area of common interest and common agreement on the terms of discussion. We can find value here, and do.
So, in a non-black-and-white world, I'll pick my fights where I think it matters, and be tolerant where it doesn't. I'll look for value where I can find it. There are times when opposition is important, but it is not everywhere.
And things will get better. They always do.
Bob.
When one door closes, another opens.
-- Cervantes, Don Quixote
The following 12 users say Thank You to bobwest for this post:
Amen to that.
What's the truth here?
1)There was no fraud in the US election.
2) There was rampant and huge fraud in the US election.
Or somewhere in the middle?
And regarding Covid 19, without looking at the SC conspiracy stuff, it should be noted that the Hong Kong flu killed 100,000 people from 1967-1970. There were no lockdowns. No draconian measures. No attempt by the govt to corral and control citizens both in public and private. The Woodstock festival occurred during this period.
So yeah,maybe the truth does lie somewhere in between.
And as for the platform, it's occasionally annoying but the best (and cheapest) I've ever used.
So there's that.
The following 2 users say Thank You to Keab for this post:
As well as being a relatively known problem, the influenza outbreak didn't flood the hospitals with people in critical care for long periods of time. Because of that it didn't swamp the health systems of the affected countries. Even ignoring that, killing 279,000 Americans in 9 months swamps 100,000 in 3 years.
We hit a new high today and I suspect the Thankgiving Spreadathon will eclipse that in 3-6 weeks time. Hopefully the legacy of this triumph of stupidity over health science will be a better response when SARS III arrives as it inevitably will (even if its a flu).
And the truth about US electoral fraud probably isn't in the "middle" either. Its probably heavily at the "proportionally very little" end because its likely to be at a similar level to the previous election. Proof otherwise has been remarkably lacking.
The following 6 users say Thank You to kiwi for this post:
Regarding Covid deaths, it's important to note that it is not clear that people have died from Covid, or died with Covid in their system. Every country has a different way of recording deaths. Germany compared very favourably with the UK early on in the year and the UK govt was in trouble. However if the UK govt had recorded deaths using the same methodology as Germany then the UK would have a similar death rate.
Excess deaths are the only way to provide any meaningful measure, and it is sad to say that practically all deaths by/with Covid are those who would have died in the very near future.
Bottom line- the Covid virus has an approximate recovery rate of.....
99.9%.
Is it too crazy to even suggest that shutting down the entire Western economy is worth it for this? Probably not.
As for the election I have a simple rule. I just reverse my thinking 180 degrees and ask myself "if it was Biden and the Democrats complaining with exactly the same evidence/witnesses etc then would I think that the election has serious issues ?" Answer-yes.
Also, statistically there are some very interesting anomalies that, when allied with numerous eye witness accounts, certainly points towards something happening. I don't watch a lot.of.news and haven't taken part in the mounting hysteria of the last few years so have no skin in this game.
Covid is not that dangerous.
The election has statistical anomalies allied with numerous eye witness accounts of irregularities which, if being proposed by the Democrats, would be given much greater weight.
Is there anything incorrect here?
The following user says Thank You to Keab for this post:
The onus is on you to provide proof that your assertions are correct. Lacking that (and it does appear to be lacking) nobody should assume that your assertions are correct.
Back to the topic of the SC rant... that was pretty bizarre. I doubt very seriously that their entire team stands behind everything in that rant, so it's strange that they would post the rant "on behalf of" the team. The person or persons who really believe that should speak for themselves.
Also, the whole "you can trust us. we're software engineers" was hilarious. I've been a software engineer for decades and believe me we have just as many nutjobs as any other profession. The "we can speak intelligently about the structural integrity of buildings because we're engineers" took the cake.
I suppose the rant was pretty harmless and I personally got a good laugh out of it so no worries. They do make great trading software.
The following 6 users say Thank You to brach for this post:
If that were to come to pass you might be able to incorporate a messaging library like zeromq. I haven't had to try this yet but suspect that eventually become helpful. Functions such as data feed, machine learning prediction, core strategy logic and execution could be distributed however you like.
Time is a concern, but zeromq has sub-ms latency (intra-machine) from what I understand so not a huge obstacle in most cases.
Here's an article I bookmarked that touches on this. I also saw a post on FIO with some discussion re NT7/NT8 integration.
) This forum has a lot of people who disagree on many things outside the scope of the forum, but who get along very well within our area of common interest and common agreement on the terms of discussion. We can find value here, and do.
