Offering the game !!!!! - page 5

New comment
 
Michel_S писал (а):
In my opinion, a trader's ideas are not theoretical formulas (there are plenty of them), but tested in demo or real trading, but definitely in online trading. Because otherwise, the value of such ideas is nothing. It turns out that your ideas need to be polished in on-line trading, and it is not the programmer's, but the trader's job.
Everyone has to do their job.
A trader's idea has to go through a test run. MTS is written to be used for its fine-tuning, polishing, optimization, and so on.
Everyone should post ideas as they are, even if they are mostly tares, but there may also be grains. Also, not everyone can easily formalise their ideas. Of course, a well-thought-out working TS is good, but why slap hands?
 
Gorillych писал (а):
KimIV wrote (a):

I'm willing to babysit him if he lets me, asking a bunch of clarifying questions. I promise not to call him a stupid lamer :).

Will you allow me to babysit you by answering a bunch of clarifying questions? :-)))

I will...
 

Here's an idea... I read a similar one in Currency Speculator. Let's take the midline and start buying from the bottom and selling from the top.
Suppose the price is falling, we buy below the average line every 100 p. Then when the price is above the average line we also close bought positions by a staircase and then sell ... again, every 10 p. A question is to choose the size of this staircase and the average line ... Of course the stop-loss system is risky... but if you diversify into several currencies and play only on swaps... it may come out well... you can also use options instead of spot... then the risks are lower... but there are downsides... The average does not stand still, isn't it easier to buy above the average, sell below the average, if so, this algorithm has long been implemented (MT-4). If you mean locked positions, when playing in the channel, you may fall into a long-term drawdown (the price went out of the channel) and then you cannot exit the lock without losses.


I'm not going to deny that it's the right way to play.... It's just an idea... it can be tested...
 
FION писал (а):
nchnch wrote (a):
Here's another idea... Let's take a flat pair. Say the pound euro... if you look at the weekly candlesticks it's been flat for a long time... ... let's divide this range in two parts up and down... go lower and buy every 50 pips higher for example and sell... go buy every 50 pips higher with a 50 pips profit... No stops (we close if the base figure shows a breakthrough... or if there is a breakthrough)... ... we can also choose the optimal grid size... if this pair stays there for another year... the profit may be very good...
How is this idea different from the previous one?

How is it different... they are two different things....:))) if you look carefully...
 
nchnch писал (а):
FION wrote:
nchnch wrote (a):
Here's another idea... Let's take a flat pair... let's say the pound euro... if you look at the weekly candlesticks it's been flat for a long time... ... let's divide this range in two parts up and down... go lower and buy every 50 pips higher for example and sell... go buy every 50 pips higher with a 50 pips profit... no stops (we close if the base figure shows a breakthrough... or if there is a breakthrough)... ... we can also choose the optimal grid size... if this pair stays there for another year ... the profit may be very good ...
How does this idea differ from the previous one in principle?

Well how... it's two different things....:)))) if you look carefully. ...
In the sense of "same eggs@@ only from the side". It's the same work in the channel.
 
FION писал (а):
Michel_S wrote (a):
I think a trader's ideas can be considered not theoretical (there are plenty of them), but tested in demo or real, but necessarily online trading. Because otherwise, the value of such ideas is nothing. It turns out that your ideas need to be polished in on-line trading, and it is not the work of a programmer, but of a trader.
Everyone has to do their job.
A trader's idea has to go through a test run. And MTS is written for its fine-tuning, polishing, optimization, and so on.
Everyone should post ideas as they are, even if they are mostly tares, but there may also be grains. Also, not everyone can easily formalise their ideas. Of course, a well-thought-out working TS is good, but why slap hands?

Of course, cooperation can also be based on this principle.

But in my practice, in real cooperation with traders, it turns out that traders start to abuse this kind of attention. It all comes down to the fact that the smallest new idea, even an absurd idea, is accepted as a brilliant one. At the same time, the programmer has an offer to quickly write an Advisor (as if it were a trivial job) and run it through an optimizer. And then the "parent" of the idea must be given all the results. If something is not successful, then in five minutes he brings a new "idea" and asks the programmer to write a new EA in five minutes. When you say, writing a working EA is not five minutes of work, then there is no limit to "AMAZING"! I, a genius idea! And you can't do the trivial job of writing an EA!

We've been down this road before.
 
Michel_S писал (а):
FION wrote (a):
Michel_S wrote (a):
I think a trader's ideas can be considered not theoretical (there are plenty of them), but tested in demo or real, but necessarily online trading. Because otherwise, the value of such ideas is nothing. It turns out that your ideas need to be polished in on-line trading, and it is not the programmer's, but the trader's job.
Everyone has to do their job.
A trader's idea has to go through a test run. And MTS is written for its fine-tuning, polishing, optimization and so on.
Let all put the ideas as they are, even if it's mostly tares, but there may be some grains. Also, not everyone can easily formalize their ideas. Of course, a well-thought-out working TS is good, but why slap your hands?

Of course, cooperation can also be based on this principle.

But in my practice, in real cooperation with traders, it turns out that traders start to abuse this kind of attention. It all comes down to the fact that the smallest new idea, even an absurd idea, is accepted as a brilliant one. At the same time, the programmer has an offer to quickly write an Advisor (as if it were a trivial job) and run it through an optimizer. And then the "parent" of the idea must be given all the results. If something is not successful, then in five minutes he brings a new "idea" and asks the programmer to write a new EA in five minutes. When you say, writing a working EA is not five minutes of work, then there is no limit to "AMAZING"! I, a brilliant idea! And you can't do the trivial job of writing an EA!

We've been over this.
It's not like we're gonna write an advisor right away. If the idea is blatantly weak or has been around for a long time, you can say so, you haven't made any commitments.
 
Michel_S писал (а):

Of course, cooperation can also be based on this principle.

But from my practice, from the real cooperation with traders, it turns out that traders start to abuse this kind of attention. It all comes down to the fact that the smallest new idea, even an absurd one, is presented as brilliant. At the same time, the programmer has an offer to quickly write an Advisor (as if it were a trivial job) and run it through an optimizer. And then the "parent" of the idea must be given all the results. If something is not successful, then in five minutes he brings a new "idea" and asks the programmer to write a new EA in five minutes. When you say, writing a working EA is not five minutes of work, then there is no limit to "AMAZING"! I, a brilliant idea! And you can't do the trivial job of writing an EA!

We've been over this.
No, the idea of the thread isn't to get free EAs. ..on ideas that don't work. It's just that why don't we exchange ideas... ...and someone else needs them... .... even if we are all programmers here....:))) That's programmer to programmer.
 
In the sense of "same balls but from the side". It's the same work in the channel. <br / translate="no">
Basically, yes... if that's what you mean...
 
Michel_S:

The trader's idea needs to be battle-tested. Statments and so on. And MTS is written to fine-tune it, polish it, optimise it and so on.
For some reason, programmers believe that their profession is difficult to master nowadays. They constantly have to deal with various language and algorithmic elements. I have two books by Herbert Schildt on my shelf behind me. It's not difficult for me to read them; it's not difficult to look through the code base and choose a template that corresponds to the features. There are no big problems in writing an EA. But if I have a worthwhile idea and can demonstrate it in real life, what does it have to do with styling? It is quite possible that the idea in the code will achieve nothing. But then it should not impress the programmer when demonstrating it in real code. And if it does and turns out to be worthwhile, it is quite natural to divide the copyright equally. Somewhere here Mak gave some list of documents which formalize such relations. So in this game, the rules should be defined first.
12345678910
New comment
Reason: