Market model: constant throughput - page 21
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
Characteristically, the thread is about the study of compression algorithms, and each of the participants throws in it all sore and worn for years. And it's like they have nothing to do with compression.
But everyone feels good for some reason. As if a company of speakers of 10 different languages would get together and have a discussion.
Against this background, Alexei's phrase to raise the discussion to a new level looks like a threat.
And your "what's it all for?" questions become irrelevant.
For perfect harmony Privalych should come along with the tics.
:)
I can't help but smile...
On the subject, in simple terms: You're on. Write again. I like it.
On a more complicated topic: the real reality far exceeds in variety of forms and possibilities even the mental passages of Alexey so much, that even he is not able to speak in understandable for masses abstractions, digestible enough, that it would be possible to understand them from the first reading of the terms, adequately describing the essence of the subject of the conversation. The diligent reader who has finished reading up to these lines gives full consent that I, a member of the forum for the language of all traders of the people of the world, am free to take your immortal soul and have the right to use it from now on and for all eternity, at the first request I may take it and dispose of it as I see fit, amen.
Off-topic: forumie, you know, the one without the avatar, what do you think of my red-white-black avatar? How's the style, the colouring, the consistency with the image I've carefully cultivated over the past two years?
Off-topic: forum member, you know, the one without the avatar, how do you like my red-white-black avatar? How's the style, the colouring, the consistency of the image I've been carefully cherishing for two years?
Briefly - I noticed it a couple of days ago, it took me a while to think about it . It seems to be loaded a lot, but it does not translate if you do not know the personal emotional messages.
A little deeper - the irrationally paradoxical interplay of deformed spherical geometrical figures, conditioned by the image carefully moulded over two years, suggests associations with the accentsthe architectonics
of the emotional aspects of super-reality evoked by the brilliant solution of the colour composition.
Briefly - paid attention a couple of days ago, thought long . It seems to be loaded a lot, but can't be translated if you don't know the personal emotional messages.
A little deeper - The irrationally paradoxical interplay of deformed spherical geometrical figures, conditioned by an image carefully lilting over two years, brings to mind associations with the accentuated architectonics
of the emotional aspects of super-reality evoked by the brilliant solution of the colour composition.
Thank you. At once one can feel the irrepressible sadness and immense grief in the voice of the one who lost his avatar. My sincere sympathies and condolences. Also I have to express my righteous indignation at the outrage of the powers that be, who move the sites of the righteous forum users to please their own unknown reasons and desires, who do their hard work for the glory of the great and mighty god of all profiteers and robot-workers. Once again, amen.
Ooh, I'm on fire...
Let the topicstarter give convincing arguments to support his point of view. Otherwise he mumbles something incomprehensible, saying that information is always the same. Before you say so, you need to define the meaning in which this information is defined.
Well, actually, almost all decent threads have strayed from the main topic. Yeah, well, it's illegal to come in here and ruin the harmony of the discussion. OK, I'll be off, then. I won't be bothering the topic and everyone else...
P.S. Please do not consider me offended, God forbid. It's just my way of having fun - along with some of the others in this thread, by the way.
Well let the topicstarter give convincing arguments to support his point of view. Otherwise he mumbles something incomprehensible, like there is always the same information. Before you say so, you need to define the meaning in which this information is defined.
Well, actually, almost all decent threads have strayed from the main topic. Yeah, well, it's illegal to come in here and ruin the harmony of the discussion. OK, I'll be off, then. I won't be bothering the topic starter or anyone else...
P.S. Please do not consider me offended, God forbid. It's just my way of having fun - along with some of the others in this thread, by the way.
I need to be isolated. Every time I say something, it's off-topic. Alexei, I'm sorry you misunderstood me. I'm the one who stole the avatar and got stupid. I apologize again.
Please either isolate me temporarily or come back
or help me out in the upper circles about the avatar, the newbies aren't loading either.
Come on, Alexey.
Now is the time - I'll check on impulses, taking into account the behaviour of the coupled pairs. I'll use... Well, I have a "pulse generator" - the easiest way, purely by bars. It takes the bar spread, smoothes it out with, say, a 20-bar MA and compares the new bar to this average. It's simple and working. Looks like this (just took a picture of the Eurobucks):
А... well, there's further movement there, by the way, as I see it. Well, it's not about this tool, but to link it with other pairs. Which I will do before the head doctor takes away the laptop...)))
Well, let the head starter make a convincing argument for his point of view. Otherwise he mumbles something incomprehensible, saying that the information is always the same. Before you say so, we must define the meaning in which this information is defined.
Well, actually, almost all decent threads have strayed from the main topic. Yeah, well, it's illegal to come in here and ruin the harmony of the discussion. OK, I'll be off, then. I won't be bothering the topic and everyone else...
P.S. Please do not consider me offended, God forbid. It's just my way of having fun - along with some of the others in this thread, by the way.
Stop fooling around. Alexei. How many more of these? How many fairy tales can you make up?
What do you have to say on the topic of the topic of the topic - tell me. You, as a moderator, see that I am in every possible way defending the thought generator from questions like: "And what for all this", and even sometimes send them, like this, "And do not you go somewhere far away? Sometimes it helps. But mostly, they come back.
My message is simple as hell, I feel that the author has something important to say, but we see only laughter from the colleagues who do not understand, asking silly questions, as well as there are reasons to flub for.
Don't be silly. Alexei. How many times? How many fairy tales can you make up (I mean me)?
What do you have on the topic topic topikstartera say - tell me. You, as a moderator, see that I am in every way defending the thought generator from questions like: "And what for all this?", and even sometimes send them, like this: "And you should go somewhere far away? Sometimes it helps. But mostly, they come back.
My messages are simple as hell, I feel that the speaker has something important to say, but we see only one laughing fool from the colleagues who do not understand, asking silly questions, as well as there are reasons to flood for.
What are you defensive? You're defensive, you farted and left, you have nothing to say on the subject, so you're giving in, at least I'm asking what I'm interested in. The topic is dumb, mathematicians did not take it for nothing, if they do not pick it up, then it will not come up, on the other hand it will always come up.
About the concept of information:
There are two objects that are connected to each other by a communication channel. The objects can be people, computers, etc. The communication channel has a limited bandwidth.
The objects on the communication channel can exchange data. The data can be represented in any form.
The bandwidth of a channel can be expressed in terms of the number of bits transmitted per unit time.
The most common way to speed up data transmission is to use encryption to reduce the encoded data, which takes up fewer bits. This is then decrypted after transmission.
The information contained in the data is the smallest set of bits that can be transferred and restored to the original data. The amount of information is the number of bits in that smallest set.
Obviously, if BP1 contains amount of information N, then BP2 = BP1 * Const contains amount of information equal to N as well. Reasoning a little further, but also simply, we can argue that if BP1 and BP2 have a rigid functional relationship, they contain the same amount of information. And if you need to transmit both BP1 and BP2 at once, you don't need to transmit N+N amount of information. You will need to transmit slightly more than N