My approach. The core is the engine. - page 108
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
A trading robot is a TOY ??? And a serious trading robot is a bulldozer???
You're a child!
If you think a trading robot is not a toy, then you are the child.
No. You don't understand.)
You don't understand that a trading robot, is a TOOL. In the hands of a naive man who believes in the Grail. There are no rules here. I want to let you interact with this toy to make it more fun to play. And you're taking it too seriously. Like, something depends on the trading robot and the trading strategy.... This is the main misconception. Illusion....))
Let them play serious trading robots, with lots of possibilities. You think that won't interest them? Wrong...)))
Holy shit, a "toy"...
You think I "believe in the Grail"? I told you more than once - ANY TS has periods of profit and loss, moreover, periods of loss are LONGER !
A robot is purely a machine that follows the rules of the TS. Roughly speaking - a traffic light. There should be no "interaction" with the traffic light. There are rules by which it operates. If those rules match the traffic flow - then the traffic light will manage it well. If they do not, traffic jams, violations and accidents will occur. Traffic light rules need to be changed.
There should not be any "toys".
Another thing is that, as I understand it, you really want to find people who perceive the robot as a toy. But how rich does a trader have to be to be indifferent to the fact that he is losing his deposit (and if you take a robot as a toy - that's the only way it could be)? Do you think there are many of them? If so, then you are additionally narrowing the niche of the product. It turns out that your target audience - it's people who can program, prefer to trade by hand, and still treat the robot they write as a toy!
I would like to see at least one such "toy programmer"...
Stop thinking like a trader for a moment. Forget pragmatism. Look at algotrading as entertainment. Adventurous. Like exciting creativity. And you'll understand me.
It is the entertainment industry that is the most dominant on the internet. If you gradually move towards GAME rather than hard trader's work, it's a new Klondike.
There's creativity, intelligence, luck and excitement. It has everything that young and naive adventurers who believe in the magical tale of the Grail need...)
If I look at trading that way - then I don't want to get involved in writing robots, visual effects, or get involved in MQLs at all. I repeat - this approach narrows the niche of the product even more.
On the contrary, it expands. Do you think everyone in the world is poor? Everyone has penny deposits and is worried about losing their last quid? That's far from it...
If there is anything that can fascinate the public, it's entertainment. But of course, everything has to be 'real'. The players must not think it's a game. For them, it's life...
I understand that many will resent this view of algotrading, but in essence they are just defending the belief in market returns. Like, it's all serious and all that... Yes, often gamblers forget that they are gambling. They think this is reality.
For me, there are no illusions about the market.
On the contrary, it expands. Do you think everyone in the world is poor? Everyone has penny deposits and is worried about losing their last quid? That's far from it...
No, not everyone in the world is poor, but you need not only treat the EA as a toy, and be able to spend a lot of money on the game - he must also be a programmer of sorts, and he must also want to trade with his hands.
So while earlier I had my doubts that there might be a small number of people who, while being able to program, are nevertheless inclined to hand trading, the approach to an expert as a "toy" - simply "shatters" the niche - I am sure that you will not find a single such person.
...
A robot is purely a machine that follows the rules of the vehicle. Roughly speaking, a traffic light. There should be no "interaction" with the traffic light. There are rules by which it operates. If those rules match the traffic flow - then the traffic light will manage it well. If they do not, traffic jams, violations and accidents will occur. Traffic light rules need to be changed.
There should not be any "toys".
...
This is your personal understanding of the nature of trade programmes. You defend your belief in the market. It is supported by your personal experience and personal beliefs.
But look at me. I perceived things differently from the start. Everyone perceives things differently. You are trying to elevate your understanding to a RULE.
But, there are NO RULES of understanding.
Understanding can be manipulated. It is a flexible substance.
A poor person is clinging to a small deposit and trying to squeeze what he can out of the market. Everything is too serious for him. And a rich person is having as much fun as he or she can. For him, a trading robot is a toy.
And who is more right?
Both are right in their own way.
This is your personal understanding of the nature of trading programmes. It protects your belief in the market. It is supported by your personal experience and personal beliefs.
But look at me. I had a different perception from the beginning. Everyone perceives things differently. You are trying to elevate your understanding to a RULE.
But, there are NO RULES of understanding.
Understanding can be manipulated. It is a flexible substance.
A poor person is clinging to a small deposit and trying to squeeze what he can out of the market. Everything is too serious for him. And a rich person is having as much fun as he or she can. For him, a trading robot is a toy.
And who is more right?
Both are right in their own way.
But that's just it, neither the first nor the second is your target audience.
It's not about the rules. The rules, indeed, can be anything. It's about who your library is for. I don't see them. And I have a big doubt about "educating such people" - after all, you have to set an example, deposit growth, usage techniques... but there's none of that. Hence the skepticism.
But that's the thing - neither the former nor the latter is your target audience!
It's not about the rules. The rules, indeed, can be anything. It's about who your library is for. I don't see them. And I have a big doubt about "educating such people" - after all, you have to set an example, deposit growth, usage techniques... but there's none of that, hence the skepticism.
People who are interested in interacting with the program. Setting up, optimizing, getting messages... Dense intellectual interaction, sucked into a form of communication that has wins and losses...
These people don't necessarily have to know how to program. They can buy a robot and learn how to work with it.
If their Expert Advisor is interesting to them, they will not throw it away after the first failure, but continue to try to work with it more effectively.
...
You don't change the trading platform when you lose.
You change the EA.
What if you don't have to change the EA? Just reconfigure it, put another strategy and that's it.
People who are interested in interacting with the programme. Setting up, optimising, receiving messages... Dense intellectual interaction, drawn into a form of communication with wins and losses...
These people don't necessarily have to know how to program. They can buy a robot and learn how to work with it.
If their Expert Advisor is interesting to them, they will not throw it away after the first failure, but continue trying to work with it more effectively.
Buy from whom? You are not offering such EAs. Any EA writer - will not use your library, at least because it is very dangerous to get hooked on someone else's code (not to mention the specifics of your programming approach).
That's the thing, the person from your target audience may not be a high-class programmer, but he should be skilled enough to write his own EA and link it to your library. Do you think there are many of them? There are very few of them, and they will hardly treat their brainchild as a "game". That's why I say your approach is interesting, but it has a very narrow niche, and if you want to find those who also perceive the Expert Advisor as a "toy" - then there is no niche at all.