Forecasting - page 9

New comment
 
dimozg:
Yes, you can! All right! Tell me, then, what is the probability of the President of the Russian Federation coming to your office?

Zero, because there is no chance of moving it.
 
Yousufkhodja Sultonov:

The probability of success with a single market entry is really 0.5 or a little less, due to the spread. But it's not enough to enter only once to achieve the final profit. We enter N times and the final probability of success turns out to be a negligible value, equal to 0.5^N. Conclusion - a random process cannot be predicted to achieve any goal.


This is the first half of the case. (Good health to all...)

The second half is "so what do we do then...?"

And this is where I always resort to this example...
There is a WAVE in the water level on the surface of the sea-ocean.
Suppose you have an overwhelming desire to get your personal benefit from this fluctuation.

And here it turns out that people are divided into two groups... One, a small group, develops "MECHANISMS" that "pump energy" from vibrations due to specific features of their design (like electric generators using surf energy), where vibrations themselves perform the necessary work.

And the other,... where people rushed to study the "characteristics of oscillation" in order to learn to predict the direction of water level changes, so as to forcibly "open their taps" even BEFORE the expected movement begins.

Now tell me, what do you think of them...?

People,...think,...what group are you in!!.
Okay, if you're just figuring out if there's any dependencies in the fluctuations... or not. But, even in that case, it's better to have a working "generator mechanism" as part of the first group... and only then, while it's "pumping" profits to you, have fun looking for addictions.

 
Yousufkhodja Sultonov:

Zero, because there is no assumption to move it.
The probability is 1! Since we assumed!
 
Yousufkhodja Sultonov:

Zero, because there is no assumption to move it.
Or can you please explain the difference in probabilities between one million and one?
 
prikolnyjkent:


This is the first half of the case. (Good health to all...)

The other half is "so what do we do then...?"

And here's where I always come up with this example...
There is a WAVE in the water level on the surface of the sea-ocean.
Suppose you have an irresistible desire to profit personally from that fluctuation.

And here it turns out that people are divided into two groups... One, a small group, develops "MECHANISMS" which "pump energy" out of vibrations due to their design features (like electric generators using surf energy), where the vibration itself performs the necessary work.

And the other,... where people rushed to study the "characteristics of oscillation" in order to learn to predict the direction of water level changes, so as to forcibly "open their taps" even BEFORE the expected movement begins.

And tell me now, what do you think of them...?

People... think... what group are you in?!
Okay, if you're just figuring out if there's an addiction in the fluctuation... or not. But, even in that case, it's more rational to have a working "generator mechanism" as part of the first group, ... and only then, while it "pumps" profit to you, "entertain" yourself in the search for dependencies.

You can't do it without the first one.
At sea - yes, put the load and wait, down - ok, up - also. But there are a lot of small movements of cargo-not enough to make a unit of useful work, and on the water we just sit over them without consequences.
And in the market it's minus spread and loss on it.
So, without predicting a change in weight, depending on the emerging series of "false" oscillations/transactions/turns or whatever (who knows) - nikokok.
And saying that you do not predict anything is a lie, it's just that you probably do not know it yourself, but you predict, just not directly the price itself.
 
ILNUR777:

...And saying that you don't predict anything is a lie, it's just that you apparently don't know it yourself, but you do predict, just not directly the price itself.


I have an example for this case too...

Take the toilet cistern.
The designer of the water supply valve PREVIOUSLY predicted that the water level in the cistern would change.

Now the valve.
When it is already made, assembled and installed where it is supposed to be, does the valve predict future changes in the water level...? Or does it already DIRECTLY react to what is happening?

And is the "forecast" made by a developer analogous to the kind of forecasting we are talking about in Forex?

 
prikolnyjkent:


I have an example for such a case too...

Take the toilet cistern.
The designer of the water supply valve PREVIOUSLY predicted that the water level in the cistern would change.

Now the valve.
When it is already made, assembled and installed where it is supposed to be, does the valve predict future changes in water levels...? Or does it already DIRECTLY react to what is happening?

And is the "prediction" made by the developer analogous to the kind of prediction we are talking about in Forex?

Efficiency is low. Taki for bread only, it won't work for salt.
 

Ehhhh ... so many opinions)) Comrades I have working robots that earn not from 100000 but from 300-800 $ about 450-650 $ . I don't need your valuable opinions about barrels and other bullshit I've been studying the physics of interactions in the market for a long time ... the forecasting is not based on nothing. first of all it's based on methods that bring the probability of profit to 100%. 85% is the minimum that can be achieved. i want only those who are interested in earning profits to answer me, not idle speculation. You can cheat brokerage companies on their own turf. But to do that you need to cheat 10-15 brokerage companies. But of course none of you have thought about it! In fact, what other crossovers all absolutely all of the standard indicators do not work for one reason: THEY ARE SHOWING THE TREND HAS ALREADY BEEN TAKEN! This is the whole nonsense) will not work as long as you work 1. with stoplosses 2. with one order 3. on one brokerage company. i have real strategies that have been developed over years. And they work 10 years in advance. i've got real strategies that i've been working on for years. i used to study the market fundamentals only on H1 M1 D1 before making forecasts. because only these timeframes show real movement of each strategy. the forecasting is 45-60% of what you need. many people will never understand the rest, because you need to create robots to do this. i am waiting for some sensible suggestions. BUT TO START WITH I'LL BE ABLE TO IMMEDIATELY UNDERSTAND WHO'S CAPABLE OF WORKING AT MY LEVEL: "WHY IS THERE A HIGHER PROBABILITY OF LOSING ON M1 THAN ON N1? I WILL WORK WITH THE CORRECT ANSWER (IT WILL TAKE ME 2 OR 3 SHEETS OF A4), THE REST, SORRY, LOOK FOR THEIR INTERSECTIONS ELSEWHERE!

WHY DO I NEED IT, THE MOST GIFTED WILL ASK:) - I HAVE TO MOVE FROM $450-650 PER MONTH TO $1200-3000 PER MONTH FROM THE SAME INITIAL DEPOSIT WHILE THERE ARE MANY BROKERAGE COMPANIES THAT I SHOULD CONTROL. + THEY ALL HAVE TO BE KEPT IN MIND TO PUT THEM IN THEIR PLACE AT THE RIGHT TIME. I WILL NOT GIVE YOU THE WORKING CODE, BUT I WILL EXPLAIN THE PRINCIPLE. I WILL GIVE YOU THE WORKING CODE BUT I WILL EXPLAIN THE PRINCIPLE.

 
prikolnyjkent:


I have an example for such a case, too...

Take the toilet cistern.
The designer of the water supply valve PREVIOUSLY predicted that the water level in the cistern would change.

Now the valve.
When it is already made, assembled and installed where it is supposed to be, does the valve predict future changes in water levels...? Or does it already DIRECTLY react to what is happening?

And is the "prediction" made by the developer analogous to the kind of prediction we are talking about in forex?

That's a good example. But very primitive.

Open the book "Cybernetics" by N. Wiener, as far back as 1948 (by the way, I advise you to read it). Anti-aircraft fire control systems. Should the fire control systems predict the future position of the aircraft, given that the aircraft can perform anti-aircraft manoeuvres, and indeed the intentions of the aircraft and its future behaviour are unknown.

SZZ already at that time the speeds of the aircraft and the projectile were comparable, and it was not the aircraft that was shot at, but the intended point of impact.

 
Yuriy Asaulenko:

A good example. But very primitive...



Of course primitive. That's the beauty of it.
1234567891011
New comment