What is everyone looking for? - page 28

New comment
 
I feel like I've hit a minefield ........ for real, I'm not kidding.
Enemies are still sitting around in trenches waiting ..... for someone to answer the question posed by .........

The only goal is to fuck around and throw grenades at the one who will be left behind.

Your position is clear to me, ........... the funny thing is that this is a collective position ...........
 
Neveteran >>:

Ощущение, что попал на минное поле ........ реально, не шучу.


Well, I'm not a doctor, but try to take a break from the computer, go for a walk in the fresh air
If the symptoms recur, see a doctor.
 
Neveteran >>:


Svinozavr я задвинул по теме, что три сигмента движений в рынке (флэт, стандартная волотильность и безоткат) имеют место. И технически есть масса способов извлекать профит из каждого варианта в отдельности. Но я незнаю ни один технический способ сигментировать (находить переход от одного к другому и третьему и обратно) что бы переключить систему (технику работы). Я даже непытался говнять ТА, понимая и утверждая, что вышесказанное есть камень преткновения. О который разбиваются ТС.

"Shall we be in sorrow!"

Well, I don't even know how to continue. Do you realize what you're talking about? No?

That's it, it's impossible to continue.

===

Shit!!! I asked you a question specifically: have you outplayed the casino??? )))


 

So where do we stand? I remember suggesting -
1) There's the ETS, which is a totally stupid TS.
2) There is SS1 absolutely smart TS
3) There is an investigated TS (ITS) (strictly on the basis of SS1 - but it uses its own signals)
4) We have a range (for any parameter of optimization) from STS to SS1, where it is worthy of signals and to some extent the indicator as a whole.

This is how to optimise the INDICATOR.

 
Svinozavr >>:

"Нам ли быть в печали!"

Ну.. я даже не знаю, как продолжить... Вы отдаете себе ответ, что вы гоните пургу? Нет?

Все, неверное, это уже невозможно продолжать.

===

Блин!! Я задал вам вопрос конкретно: вы переиграли казино??? )))



Holy crap ....................., the staggering stupidity ..........

first post on the thread wrote ................. Logically I conclude, an indicator as a system for finding recurring patterns. Conditionally dynamic, and the market, absolutely dynamic. (As far as I know, no indicator can signal these types of movements.

Svinozavr wrote(a) >> Shit!!! I asked you a question specifically: have you overplayed the casino??? )))
You want to discuss my approach to trading? So this is the wrong thread ................

>> the specific answer is I wasn't even trying to outplay the casino!

 
SProgrammer >>:

В качестве факта надо наверное брать зигзаг некий определенный и одинаковый для всех анализируемых индиктаров. Вполне разумно даже прогнать на неком инструменте этот зигзаг сложить в файл его буфера, и потом в тестере прочитав из этого файла уже сравнивать с тем что показывает исследуемый индиктор.

Why the fuck ZZ and not something else so terribly grail in history, like, say, fractals? No one has answered that question for me.
And why is ZZ a definite and identical one, regardless of the TS under study? Well here I don't understand how you can compare the same asshole with completely different toes of different beasties...
Neveteran >> I feel like I've hit a minefield ........ for real, I'm not kidding.
Enemies are still sitting around in trenches waiting ..... for someone to answer the question posed by .........

The goal is the same, - to fuck around and throw grenades at [...] The funny thing is that this is a collective position ...........
You seem to like it here nonetheless. If you didn't like it, you'd just leave offended and never come back.
 
Mathemat писал(а) >>
So why the fuck ZZ and not something else creepily grainy on the story - say, fractals? That's a question no one has answered for me.
And why is ZZ definite and the same, regardless of the TS (and TS) under study? You seem to have liked it here nonetheless. If you didn't like it, you would simply leave offended and not come back.


And why is the square root of -1 = i ?

*** I don't like it. :))

 
Mathemat >>:
Ну почему же, млять, именно ЗЗ, а не что-нибудь еще жутко граальное на истории - скажем, фракталы? На этот вопрос мне никто не ответил.
И почему ЗЗ - определенный и одинаковый, вне зависимости от исследуемой ТС (иТС)?

Really fucking why? In a couple of weeks I'll show you that zz is not something to look up to.

Hm, that's what fractals should be checked too - I will.

 
joo писал(а) >>

Really fucking why? In a couple of weeks I'll show you that zz is not something to look up to.

Hmmm, that's what fractals should have been checked too by the way - I'll check it out.


>>) zz can't be something not to be equal to. >>)) ZZ is a FUNCTION on parameters :)

 
SProgrammer >>:

А почему считается что корень квадратный из -1 = i ?

This notation was invented by who the hell knows who to expand the domain of R, but Euler fixed it forever with his formula exp(Pi*i)=-1.

1...212223242526272829303132333435...39
New comment