Would you expect exchanges to permit everyone to trade directly? How would you police the consequences of, for example, no entry policing? How would you want to police requirements if everyone is on the exchange or some venue (e.g., around algorithms)?

But complexities of any new system aside, what is an example of a cashing in of an unneeded example in terms of an activity?

▲

littlecranky67 2 hours ago | parent [-]

You public key is registered with a kyc progress. Transactions (transfer of shares) is only settled when all parties have a kyc-verified key. Again, centralized chain (proof of authority). Any and all transactions can be reversed and changed by the regulator if needed. The main difference over today is, you have a open, access-to-all (after kyc) and no intermediaries.

Examples for cashing in: payment for order flow (was recently banned in the EU). They litterally sold their trading data of retail clients for money.

Not sure how you think brokers make money, but they get kickbacks from market makers and fund providers, or simply higher spreads. No one works for free.

▲

RandomLensman 2 hours ago | parent [-]

You want transactions to be easily reversible?

Payment for order: what data was sold (or do you mean the orders as data)?

You mean broker as in a pure broker, not broker-dealer?

What about policing algorithms, for example? Who'd do that and how?

Who provides liquidity? Just natural supply and demand?

▲

littlecranky67 2 hours ago | parent [-]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payment_for_order_flow

Sorry, I thought you just had some idea about basic financial services.

	▲	RandomLensman 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I have some fairly good understanding actually, hence my point about just data vs orders. Not sure what you want me to take from your link specifically?