Forget random quotes - page 33

New comment
 
Mathemat:

Market efficiency is quite different from machine efficiency.

I'm not too good with formulas here too, but it seems to be a term invented for investors/traders who are not too friendly with mathematics. Just to make it clearer for them.

There are three degrees of efficiency - weak, medium, strong. They all assert the impossibility of sustained profitable trading under different information constraints.

Probably efficiency is strictly defined through martingale, but I'm not sure. Actually the price as a martingale by this or that informational set just defines this degree of efficiency.

Well, look here, Oleg. It is difficult to formalize information sets.

That is the point, Alexey, that here (in such "definitions") there is a clear substitution of concepts, as in a distorting mirror.

The category of efficiency has great theoretical and practical value - the general theory of systems is engaged in this area, there is such a direction. So, knowing what's what in this field, I can clearly see the absurdity and upside down in the fiefdom of "market efficiency/inefficiency".

Faa took offence at me, for some reason taking my criticism of such definitions as an attack on him personally, and in vain.

One of his main arguments in support of these "market miracles" is the following: "1000000 traders all over the world use it, so it's right".

What can be said about it ...

A herd of 1,000 sheep, led by a shepherd to the slaughter, walks... and each of them must be thinking in the same way "1000 of my fellows are going, so it must be so, and if I have any doubts, I cannot be right, because everyone is going, so it must be right" .... This is one side of the coin, so to speak, one truth. But there is another side of the coin, another truth - the truth of a shepherd leading the sheep to slaughter, he has his own expediency.

Now, where I'm going with this... And to the point that such 'shifter definitions' are probably not accidentally shifters....

Well, I think the sensible one has had enough.

 
Oh! I'm stocking up on popcorn here, tell me about the "market" system, in terms of general theory.
 
HideYourRichess:
Oh! I'm stocking up on popcorn here, tell me about the "market" system, in terms of general theory.
you're wasting your time... no one's gonna tell me anything.
 

avtomat:


Well, I think a reasonable person would suffice.

I don't understand shit.


>
 
HideYourRichess:
Oh! I'm stocking up on popcorn here, tell me about the "market" system, in terms of general theory.

Oh, I don't like your condition. Usually before a catastrophic loss, you get like this.

Be careful, take care of your deposit, don't overdo the risks.

 
Mischek2:

I don't understand a fucking thing.

It's for the best... I won't have nightmares ;)))
 
avtomat:
It's for the best... I won't have nightmares ;)))
It was rightly noted that there is a lot of uncertainty and liberties in interpreting the concepts of a perfect or imperfect market, and trying to go through all the references only adds to the uncertainty. My understanding of a perfect market is that the market is perfect in the sense that it cannot be described by regularities, rules, etc., etc.
 
avtomat:
you're wasting your time... no one's gonna tell you anything here.
why not? it's not like it's a secret algorithm or methodology.
 
HideYourRichess:
Why? It's not like there are hidden algorithms and methods.
it's too broad a topic for popcorn.
 
avtomat:
this topic is too broad -- popcorn won't do it.

We have to wait for Friday and Sanka with beer.
1...262728293031323334353637383940...66
New comment