A topic for traders. - page 68
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
Let them laugh. Jordan Bruno was also laughed at and even burned at the stake.
The Inquisitors were not known for their cleverness.)
The only difference is thatBruno was remembered for centuries as a prominent thinker of his time, but whether another forum braggart Izersky will be remembered is a big question 😁
Anyway I even wish you luck and hope you can change and stop being a public laughing stock.
If you want to be remembered as Bruno so badly - you need to brag less and work more with hypothesis testing by statistical methods.
Let them laugh. Jordan Bruno was also laughed at and even burned at the stake.
The Inquisitors didn't stand out for much intelligence.)
Manechka is progressing, the imaginary crown on his head is growing. Who do you compare yourself to next? Einstein? Maybe Da Vinci?
Giordano Bruno did and said things, you do not say anything at all on the case, you just talk about some achievements that supposedly exist, but you will not show them to anyone, because oooh, no way it can be allowed, because the world markets will collapse from such a technological breakthrough)))
The only difference is thatBruno will be remembered for centuries as an eminent thinker of his time, but whether another forum braggart Izersky will be remembered is a big question 😁
Anyway I even wish you luck and hope you can change and stop being a public laughing stock.
If you want to be remembered as Bruno so badly - you need to brag less and work more with hypothesis testing using statistical methods.
Thanks for the wish.
But don't get so worked up about me, with such cumbersome op-eds about me. You're a thoughtful gentleman;=)
Thanks for the wish.
But don't worry so much about me, with such cumbersome op-eds about me. You're a thoughtful gentleman;=)
Look at this level of serious research, for example:
https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=ohiou1127333497& disposition=inline
Not necessarily a neural network as in this example, just the level of quantitative research itself should be much deeper than drawing on a graph.
Or here is another example:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0898122113000291
A combination classifier with forward analysis, predictor significance analysis, robustness analysis, crossvalidation, rather than just colouring graphs, is a good idea.
See, for example, what level of serious research this should be:
https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=ohiou1127333497& disposition=inline
Not necessarily a neural network as in this example, just the level of quantitative research itself should be noticeably deeper than drawing on a graph.
Or here is another example:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0898122113000291
A combination classifier with forward analysis, predictor significance analysis, robustness analysis, crossvalidation, rather than just colouring graphs, is a good idea.
See, for example, what level of serious research this should be:
https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=ohiou1127333497& disposition=inline
Not necessarily a neural network as in this example, just the level of quantitative research itself should be noticeably deeper than drawing on a graph.
Or here is another example:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0898122113000291
A good thing is to have a classifier of combinations with forward analysis, predictor significance analysis, stability analysis, cross-validation, and not just coloring graphs.
There is a category of people who like to write books. They pick up the material, justify other people's ideas with their graphs, write chains of formulas, create scientific beauty and make money from the sales of these books. But this is a near-market business. I don't need it. I am a lazy speculator. I don't need a checkerboard, I need to ride the market. I get pleasure out of it and funds for my needs. I got over my laziness and shared my wave system on my blog (not about TS) and now someone is demanding some scientific proof of how to make millions on this system. They urgently want a quick easy money, you see))).
My mathematical wave model is simple and perfect. It is suitable not only for markets, but also for other areas of human activity and natural phenomena.
For smart people, even these tips are enough to get a lot out of the market.
I see on other forums many traders have adopted my ideas. They are working and do not complain).
There is a category of people who love to write books. They pick up the material, justify other people's ideas with their graphs, write chains of formulas, create scientific beauty and make money from the sales of these books. But this is a near-market business. I don't need it. I am a lazy speculator. I don't need a checkerboard, I need to ride the market. I get pleasure out of it and funds for my needs. I got over my laziness and shared my wave system on my blog (not about TS) and now someone is demanding some scientific proof of how to make millions on this system. They urgently want a quick easy money, you see))).
My mathematical wave model is simple and perfect. It is suitable not only for markets, but also for other areas of human activity and natural phenomena.
For smart people, even these tips are enough to get a lot out of the market.
I see on other forums many traders have adopted my ideas. (They are working and do not complain).
But you're not going anywhere, but stomping around in the dark - and do not make money - and we both know this ...
And you don't have a model.
And no one has adopted it, so who are you kidding again?
You're just a braggart.
😁
The funny thing is that the character thinks everyone here is eager to scout and steal his'Grail'. 😆
It has long been observed that the lower the level of understanding of trading in practice, the more fables and tales about some special super-efficient system that is also"...suitable not only for markets, but also for other areas of humanity as well as natural phenomena"- already on this phrase any adequate trader/manager would laugh.
All this deserves to be regretted...
In the end, such braggarts inevitably end up at the broken trough.
It has long been observed that the lower the level of understanding of trading in practice, the more fables and tales about some special super-efficient system that is also"...suitable not only for markets, but also for other areas of humanity as well as natural phenomena"- already on this phrase any adequate trader/manager would laugh.
All this deserves to be regretted...
In the end, such braggarts inevitably end up at the broken trough.
Hmm???
I'm thinking.
And why are you squealing at me like that?
I get it!
You're trying to take over the lead in the teeth-grinding.)
Judging by the big posts, you're good at it.)
Keep it up.)
I'm done talking to you.
See, for example, what level of serious research this should be:
https://etd.ohiolink.edu/apexprod/rws_etd/send_file/send?accession=ohiou1127333497& disposition=inline
Not necessarily a neural network as in this example, just the level of quantitative research itself should be noticeably deeper than drawing on a graph.
Or here is another example:https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0898122113000291
What we need is a classifier of combinations with forward-looking analysis, predictor significance analysis, robustness analysis, cross-validation, not just coloring graphs.
neuro again...
in this case it would be the same if we apply the RAMER-DOUGLAS-PECKER ALGORITHM
Think with your head rather than hoping for a miracle from the processor