Discussing the merits of HFT is similar to discussing the merits of different approaches to cryptography.  Because there&#x27;s such a vast amount of prerequisite knowledge required for analysis, one either has to slog through the learning curve or look for expert opinions.<p>So who are these experts in HFT that should be referenced?  Certainly not me or Michael Lewis.<p>One source I like to follow is 
Eric Hunsader.  One of his claims to fame is catching a leak in FOMC data that led to a policy change by the Federal Reserve [1].<p>My own take on the HFT debate: HFT is here to stay; the method of trading is not the problem, the danger is that no regulator can monitor the massive stream of quotes and trades and accurately sift out bad actors. What&#x27;s the solution -- I have no clue, but arbitrarily slowing down trades is not useful.<p>[1]<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nanex.net&#x2F;aqck2&#x2F;4473.html" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nanex.net&#x2F;aqck2&#x2F;4473.html</a><p>Edit:<p>Apparently no true Scotsman would follow Nanex as a source.  Duly noted. :) I&#x27;d be interested to hear of other sources that at least attempt in depth analysis like Nanex.