Whether there is a process whose analysis of one part does not allow predicting the next part. - page 4

New comment
 
joo:

Yes, porquoi would not pas? - But, a whole other question, would I be as interested in making money, but already "on the other side"?

Would you?


I don't know this business in numbers. What makes you think it's easy? Do you think that if you buy business centres for example with this amount, the profit will be less?
 
joo:

Yeah, why wouldn't they?

Hmm. It used to be that you could start your own DC with 200k at the entrance. Now you probably need at least 500k and a very specific direction of development.

Mischek2:

A joke? A provocation? ))

delusion ) finding patterns everywhere you can and can't is a default brain chip. Sometimes it gets in the way a lot.
 
Mischek2:

I don't know this business in numbers. What makes you think it's easy? Do you think that if you buy business centres for example with this amount, the profit will be less?
Did I say it was easy? Besides - there is no such thing as a completely risk-free business. Brokerage has its own risks, but no longer related to "predicting the process". :)
 
TheXpert:

Hm. It used to be that you could start your own DC with 200k at the entrance. Now you probably need at least 500k and a very specific direction for development.

Well, I understand that it's not about kitchens and not about these figures. You don't have to bother with all the calculations.

Everybody has the same approach - it's better where we're not. As they learn that the factory price of a modern TV set is around 10 quid, they start either crying about the sharks of capitalism or "I'll buy it wholesale".

Completely ignorant of what is involved at every stage up to the shop's warehouse.

 
Mischek2:

Well, I gather it's not about the kitchens or those figures.

All the more reason, then. From the point of view of the beginning.
 
joo:

1. What is the point of looking at a series that has nothing to do with the process? - it is about studying and predicting a hypothetical process and the numerical series belonging to it.

There is no point in predicting, that's what I wrote about - illogical. But consideration of such a series may allow to derive criteria to determine: the series is a representation of some process, at least in a given time interval, or the numerical series is not a representation of any process. Although this is not really your question, so I apologise for the flub.
 
alsu:
By the way, better than MathRand()&0x00000001 in terms of performance

Fucking hell...

Thanks !!!!!

2012.05.08 01:19:40     RandomSpeed-Test (AUDNZD,M5)    random 100000000 rand()&0x00000001  time = 1311 ms
2012.05.08 01:19:38     RandomSpeed-Test (AUDNZD,M5)    random 100000000 rand()%2           time = 2106 ms
 
MetaDriver:

Fucking hell...

Thank you !!!!!

Single-stroke operations rule.

It's also useful to know about replacing x*2 by x<<1 and x/2 by x>>1, and with powers of two, too.

 
I remember the first time I was flattened by the existence of these fast substitutions, when the institute explained hardware FFT calculators, where just a bunch of these features are used. And then there's such a thing as "iterative methods" - it's hard to grasp how, for example, trigonometric expressions can be calculated in just a few simple operations...
 
alsu:

One-step operations rule.

It's also useful to know about replacing x*2 by x<<1 and x/2 by x>>1, and with powers of two, too.

This is self-similar.
1234567891011...17
New comment
Reason: