Machine learning in trading: theory, models, practice and algo-trading - page 1360
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
As far as I remember, you can pay $600 a month and you can shoot at least every nanosecond.
That's why I asked about profitability - in order to estimate the scale...
I think you are confused about something, but not Mr. Saveliev, who devoted his whole life to the study of the brain.
I made it for general education, not for discussion, especially with those who do not know anything.
If you don't want to discuss it with an open mind, close it... he talks some bullshit.You're very young, do not look for authorities, learn to judge the world for yourself!
You are very young, don't look for authority, learn to judge the world for yourself!
Fuck you, old man, teacher!
he's gone crazy today)) he ate too much catbusts or somethingThe model I showed the other day is just the first experiments. How will it turn out? - I have no idea.
So, I also have just a movement forecast. The old model just shows that the transaction may be profitable, without specifying what and how much - classification. Showed the pictures a year and a half ago.
Potential - well, yes, there is a lot to strive for). Confirmation - look at the speed and volumes - the process must evolve. The dynamics are different from the usual fluctuations.
That is, after receiving a signal, you wait some more time to assess the development - this question is no longer clear.
On the subject of brain research. To create AI, it is probably not worth trying to know or model the entire human brain. The biological brain deals with a huge number of tasks to control organs and regulate metabolism, and the machine does not need this nonintellectual workload, so it is better to focus on modeling cognitive and mental processes, since they are the main thing we need in practice. Studying the brain for medical purposes is a different task.
"Physical" study of the brain will not lead to an understanding of how thinking or the psyche works. It's like cognizing software by hardwiring. We need a different kind of analysis. We need to take what we know about logic, subconsciousness, consciousness, memory, psyche, and make a dynamic model that we can try to program.
Fuck you, old man teacher.
You've gone crazy today)) You ate too much catbusts or something.Age is a state of mind.
No need to stir the air, I thought you woke up interest in science, advised good literature, and you're somehow rude ...
I am not mad.
I think you are confused about something, but not Mr. Saveliev, who devoted his whole life to the study of the brain.
I'm not discussing it with people who don't know anything.
There is a scientist X, a biologist, who devoted his life to biorhythms. But somewhere in his 40s he became interested in the rhythms of the universe. Goes to physical institutes and tries to make a report there. Of course they all send him, and say that they know this without him, and they do not need his rhythms. Periodically, he performs on various radio and TV channels, and he does the same thing. Enthusiasts torture their experiments. The man clearly does not understand what he does. Pathetic show.
But as a biologist and biochemist he is a good known scientist.
Age is a state of mind.
I thought you were interested in science, I advised good literature, and you are so rude...
I'm not angry.
Psychology is not a science, calm down, you old nut, calm down... I know better than some people.
There is a scientist X, a biologist, who devoted his life to biorhythms. But somewhere around the age of 40 he became interested in the rhythms of the universe. Goes to physical institutes and tries to make a report there. Of course they all send him, and say that they know this without him, and they do not need his rhythms. Periodically, he performs on various radio and TV channels, and he does the same thing. Enthusiasts torture their experiments. The man clearly does not understand what he does. Pathetic show.
But as a biologist and biochemist, he is a famous scientist.
What is the moral point?
like Saveliev went somewhere? well, maybe... at least he tells interesting factsOn the topic of brain research. To create an AI, it's probably not worth trying to know or model the entire human brain. The biological brain deals with a huge amount of organ management and metabolic regulation, and the machine does not need this nonintellectual workload, so it is better to focus on modeling cognitive and mental processes, since they are the main thing we need in practice. Studying the brain for medical purposes is a different task.
Probably just modeling metabolic regulation would be easier, I think, than teaching a machine to think. And in general, indeed, AI in its pure form and the human brain are quite different.