"The 'perfect' trading system - page 50
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Apparently, it's a stumbling block to me. By the way, couldn't find the original text.
_____________
Mr. VictorArt, it's not for you to judge my level. I have enough serious and huge projects at my main job, here I have more entertainment, which by the way brings profit.
As for the indicators - what's wrong with specialization? It's better than messing with people's heads.
But I can proudly say that I hardly ever cheated anyone with money.
_____________
A different level? Well, well, at least my EAs have stops and no martin.
_____________
On the advisor. It's amazing how many brains can be inserted into 8Kb of "adaptive" source code.
Don't tell me it's just a simple example. Example of what? The use of CA? So there is no adaptivity. There's no such thing as CM.
Adaptivity implies auto-tuning of the adaptive parameter. There is nothing like that in the code.
And do not try to escape, like I do not understand it. Don't worry, I have enough skill to figure out two hundred lines of simple code.
_____________
In general and in general, KG\AM, at least start a new thread for your own rubbish, so as not to litter another's thread.
Are you talking to yourself? :)
The process has taken on a life of its own...
What's it got to do with me?
VictorArt писал(а) >>
The process has taken on a life of its own...
What's it got to do with me?
Um, okay, forget it. The last two paragraphs still stand.
No, it's not a funny branch, it can't be compared to Niroba.
"What a navigator this is! A yawning bore. Remember the second navigator - that one was really entertaining! How he lifted his T-shirt and showed meteorite traces!
And here we have NLP.
1. Come up with your own "theory of the trade", different from all the existing ones.
2. To invent a special terminology that no one uses or understands.
3. Fix the situation: promote the "new trading theory" with "new terminology".
4. Attach an ordinary Expert Advisor made allegedly according to the "new trading theory". Doesn't matter if it is profitable or a drain.
5. Explain the advisor's profit or loss with the originality of the theory, using their own terminology.
6. Reject criticism, accusing opponents of being illiterate and not understanding the new theory and new terminology.
And how can one argue with that? Unassailable as a thimbler. But not captivating. The last navigator was actually funnier. :))
No, it's not a funny branch, it can't be compared to Niroba.
"What a navigator this is! A yawning bore. Remember the second navigator - that one was really entertaining! How he lifted his T-shirt and showed meteorite traces!
And here we have NLP.
1. Come up with your own "theory of the trade", different from all the existing ones.
2. To invent a special terminology that no one uses or understands.
3. Fix the situation: promote the "new trading theory" with "new terminology".
4. Attach an ordinary Expert Advisor made allegedly according to the "new trading theory". Doesn't matter if it is profitable or a drain.
5. Explain the advisor's profit or loss with the originality of the theory, using their own terminology.
6. Reject criticism, accusing opponents of being illiterate and not understanding the new theory and new terminology.
And how can one argue with that? Unassailable as a thimbler. But not captivating. The last navigator was actually funnier. :))
Tremendous, which is tilimilitrium for hello. Let's go for a ride in the clouds...
No, it's not a funny branch, it can't be compared to Niroba.
"What a navigator this is! A yawning bore. Remember the second navigator - that one was really entertaining! How he lifted his T-shirt and showed meteorite traces!
And here we have NLP.
1. Come up with your own "theory of the trade", different from all the existing ones.
2. To invent a special terminology that no one uses or understands.
3. Fix the situation: promote the "new trading theory" with "new terminology".
4. Attach an ordinary Expert Advisor made allegedly according to the "new trading theory". Doesn't matter if it is profitable or a drain.
5. Explain the advisor's profit or loss with the originality of the theory, using their own terminology.
6. Reject criticism, accusing opponents of being illiterate and not understanding the new theory and new terminology.
And how can one argue with that? Unassailable as a thimbler. But not captivating. The last navigator was actually funnier. :))
>> "downed airman" .....
About the EA. It's amazing how much brains can be put into 8kb of "adaptive" EA source code.
But don't tell me that it is just a simple example. An example of what? An application of the CM? So there is no adaptivity. Not so much with the CM.
Adaptivity implies autotuning of adaptive parameter. There is nothing like that in the code.
And do not try to escape, like I do not understand it. Don't doubt that I have enough skill to grasp two hundred lines of simple code.
Limit and Stop are two adaptive parameters.
As you can see from this bit of code:
if( sumProfit > StopBase/2 )
limit = sumProfit/SIZE_BUF;
if( sumLoss > StopBase/2 )
stop = sumLoss/SIZE_BUF;
they are autotuned.
So you really didn't understand the code - that's a fact.
Don't twist it - you denied the existence of inertia, confirming it by saying that there are no physical bodies in the market and therefore no inertia. Very convincing.))) And I was talking about TS, which assume continuation of the trend, which by definition is inertia. Including yours.
Yeah, and there are no trends in the market - they are trends, they are inertial movements (look in the dictionary - what is inertia). And volatility is also an elusive (inertial) entity. Was on mngnveen - it is not. It is unfixable. Buddy, everything in the world moves from momentum to momentum in a state of inertia. Including you and me, thoughts and price. (Just don't mention quantum physics here, okay? ))))
"Inertia (from Latin inertia - inaction), inertia (in mechanics), a property of material bodies, reflected in the 1st and 2nd laws of mechanics. When external influences on the body (forces) are absent or are mutually balanced, I. is manifested in the fact that the body maintains its unchanged state of motion or rest in relation to the so-called inertial reference frame. If, however, an unbalanced system of forces acts on the body, the property of I. is manifested in the fact that the change in the state of rest or motion of the body, i.e. the change in the velocity of its points, occurs gradually, not instantaneously; at the same time the motion changes the slower the greater the I. of the body. The measure of I. of a body is its mass." BSE
The dictionary says that it is a property of material bodies.
The price is clearly not a material body. What kind of inertia can we be talking about in relation to price?
"Impulse (from Latin impulsus - impact-push), 1) mechanical impulse, a measure of mechanical motion; it is a vector quantity, equal for a material point to the product of the mass m of this point by its velocity v".
The price has mass, too, doesn't it? :)
You're engaging in pseudoscience and also being offended by something you don't understand.