Random wandering - page 5

New comment
 
ILYA_365:

Do I understand you correctly that it is possible to make money on the sub, but the costs will eventually go into deficit?

You can, but only by chance. It is impossible to find a function that deducts positive equity from SB (because there is no positive equity in SB by construction). But even if you are lucky, this random equity obtained from the searched SB will have an average of much lower costs in the form of commissions and slippages. That is, even if you were lucky enough to get such a function, you would still not be able to earn it.
 
Vladimir Baskakov:
All the SB adepts have already been tomatized here. Perhaps one of them is back, playing dumb, hoping to resuscitate the topic

I told you, if you don't want to talk business, don't post here

 
Vasiliy Sokolov:
You can, but only by chance. It is impossible to find a function that will randomly deduct positive equity from SB. But even if you are lucky, this random equity obtained from the desired SB will have an average much lower cost in commissions and slippages. That is, even if you were lucky enough to get such a function, you would still not be able to earn it.

I hear you.

 
Andrei Trukhanovich:

A small observation. No one (i.e. not a single person) has been able to show normal real monitoring from those who stubbornly prove with their mouths that it is possible to make money on a coin.

Prove the claim in a public experiment, too (jumping off before the start at one stage or another to discuss details).

Monitoring is exactly the kind of thing that's plentiful here. Putting a martin on SB and playing a probability shift to push the imminent collapse somewhere in the future.

 
I wrote normal )
 

According to the article, there is another secret of the firm:

Каждая последующая котировка будет высчитываться, как предыдущая плюс случайное число в диапазоне от "-1" до "+1". Как только будут получены 60 «сделок», они будут преобразованы в минутную свечу

This condition results in a flat chart, where by increasing the stop to the size of the spread of the chart, you can negate the number of lots. The idea is that the price increment should also be random, then the probability of a prolonged trend and a flat will be equal.

They have created refined conditions for themselves and make profit there :)


Like this, here too, the increment is constant:

 

Some bullshit written by . The increment is accidental, but the graph does turn out to be flat.

Only 10,000 "time units". It starts with 100 "rubles".

Gain from -0.5 to +0.5, the gain 1, the chart scale 40

Increment from -5 to +5, incremental range 10, the chart has the widest range 350

Gain from -50 to +50, incremental range 100, the spread of the graph 4500


 

Here's a trend catching move, from the tenth time :)

The increment is from -50 to +50, the increment is 100, the spread is 8500.

So far the preliminary conclusion is: the guys in the article have an insufficient sample.

 
Aleksei Stepanenko:

Here's a trend catching move, from the tenth time :)

The increment is from -50 to +50, the increment is 100, the spread is 8500.

So far the preliminary conclusion is: the guys in the article have an insufficient sample.

That's the point of the phrase, that we can earn) ensemble sample with expectation 0. But there are trend tails among samples, and according to the theorem, the trend may be infinite. I.e. the statement that among infinite number of samples there will be variants with infinite trend is true.
 
Anything is possible, even if it's 50/50. Experience matters. Everything is amenable to man.
123456789101112...58
New comment