From theory to practice. Part 2 - page 174
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
Well, some particularly ridiculous brigadiers argue that in correct price models price increments have no variance or even expectation at all (Levy flights).
Overlearning is in the sense of adjusting to history. We try to learn from history, and tomorrow, or the day after, or the week after, what we have relied on floats on its own. Overlearned means.
You can see how many people take advantage of history and take advantage of it for profit. I have great disrespect for such people.)
But to see the future, it is probably a natural gift.
Prices walk legitimately in their fairly accurate ranges, without observing the historical fit.
Fitting at real historical prices apparently betrays logic, which is why the market lives. That's a good thing).
I think let's not repeat the drunken mistakes of getting me and you banned for the joy and ridicule of others)))
Every financial instrument, like every human being in society, is individual and at the same time subject to certain laws.
The laws of financial markets are quite clearly defined by nature, but are not available to everyone. After some time, the market will be liquidated, under one common task. That is the management of society. Whether it will succeed without a cataclysm is doubtful. Cataclysm is already a known way into a caveman image for the new advent of fat life awareness.
Hi, yes of course it's better to maintain a high cultural code, by the way, and I wasn't addressing you directly now, but it's still funny that you identified yourself in those descriptions 😉
I see the comparison of society with the market as a rather convincing metaphor in general, behind it is the general idea of forming group dynamics as a whole on the basis of behavioural preferences of individual members, and according to systems theory, emergence of emergence - some new quality of the system as a whole that is absent in the sum of elements, that is, the system should exhibit new qualities that its elements do not have, though proving it so far is problematic for markets.
In the society it is not necessary to prove it, because obvious superstructures arise, but whether similar superstructures exist in the market is still a question, whether it is something more than the sum/averaging of positions of market participants? And what should such a market superstructure look like? So far, the obvious thing is the collapse of the utopian model of the rational investor, not that they are all irrational, just that their goals and horizons are very different from the naive model of the rational investor. And the market itself has only two obvious functions so far: determining fair value (+ all the sub-functions of that) and an additional complex redistribution of the aggregate product (from the poor to the rich hehe) but I strongly disagree with the further positions.
Why should this market be abolished? Is cyber-communism coming or what? Pricing will be irrelevant due to dramatically increased productivity? So far, it doesn't show, and there will still be some rare resources/capabilities with a strongly non-zero cost. Next about cataclysms. Cataclysms are inherent to the economy, and crises revive the economy, it has long been known, and it is inherent to the evolutionary process in general, an uneven rate of change and crisis transitions, it is normal. Well, theoretically, if nuclear fusion is hopped up, the energy industry will be in turmoil, of course, traditional generation companies and energy suppliers will be sharply sucked (though not all), that is all normal in the sense that it is supposed to be that way. Some sort of reasonable smoothing will also come of itself, not cannibals at all.
But as for modeling structures, with markets it's the same thing as with weather for example, we know for example the general trend (warming) and seasonality, and we can operate with some degree of probability of temperature/fall a couple of days ahead, it's pure stochastic model as far as I know with rapid drop in accuracy after a few days. The weather is of course easier due to very pronounced diurnal cycles, there is no such lafa in the markets, and if there were, it would be traded, and it would dissipate instantly due to the actions of the participants themselves.
Prices cannot have a model at all, in the TV sense of the term)
Financial time series models (ARIMA, GARCH, etc.). Some of them won Nobel prizes.
Financial time series models (ARIMA, GARCH, etc.). Some of them won Nobel prizes.
Hi, yes of course it's better to maintain a high cultural code, by the way, and I wasn't addressing you directly now, but it's still cool that you identified yourself in these descriptions 😉
I see the comparison of society with the market as a rather convincing metaphor in general, behind it is the general idea of forming group dynamics as a whole on the basis of behavioural preferences of individual members, and according to systems theory, emergence of emergence - some new quality of the system as a whole that is absent in the sum of elements, that is, the system should exhibit new qualities that its elements do not have, though proving it so far is problematic for markets.
In the society it is not necessary to prove it, because obvious superstructures arise, but whether similar superstructures exist in the market is still a question, whether it is something more than the sum/averaging of positions of market participants? And what should such a market superstructure look like? So far, the obvious thing is the collapse of the utopian model of the rational investor, not that they are all irrational, just that their goals and horizons are very different from the naive model of the rational investor. And the market itself has only two obvious functions so far: determining fair value (+ all the sub-functions of that) and an additional complex redistribution of the aggregate product (from the poor to the rich hehe) but I strongly disagree with the further positions.
Why should this market be abolished? Is cyber-communism coming or what? Pricing will be irrelevant due to dramatically increased productivity? So far, it doesn't show, and there will still be some rare resources/capabilities with a strongly non-zero cost. Next about cataclysms. Cataclysms are inherent to the economy, and crises revive the economy, it has long been known, and it is inherent to the evolutionary process in general, an uneven rate of change and crisis transitions, it is normal. Well, theoretically, if nuclear fusion is hopped up, the energy industry will be in turmoil, of course, traditional generation companies and energy suppliers will be sharply sucked (though not all), that is all normal in the sense that it is supposed to be that way. Some sort of reasonable smoothing will also come of itself, not cannibals at all.
But as for modeling structures, with markets it is the same thing as with weather for example, we know e.g. general trend (warming) and seasonality, and we can operate with some degree of probability of temperature/fall a couple of days ahead, it is pure stochastic model as far as I know with rapid drop in accuracy after a few days. The weather is of course easier with very pronounced diurnal cycles, there is no such lafa in the markets, and if there were, it would be traded and it would dissipate instantly due to the actions of the participants themselves.
High talker ability leaves behind the ability to analyse events and actions).
Come on. This has nothing to do with me.))
There is a desire of a certain group of families or individuals to achieve supremacy over the whole world. I think that's clear to everyone by now.
And we're trading up to that point... ...until there's one major currency, understandably. And that might be the yuan.
You can't put a Nobel Prize on bread)
Nothing to add))
You can't put a Nobel Prize on bread)
You're on a roll today ))). You articulate.
You can't put a Nobel Prize on bread)
Well like 1.1 million thalers, yes I realise that's very little, of course 😁
You're on a roll today ))))
Doctor, are you from St. Petersburg?