Forget random quotes - page 31
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
I saw a move once... 140 pips... that's when Chavez was trading 20 quid for the euro... he did it off the shoulder :)
Why didn't you make a friendly trade? He was counting on you to screw the old man. Must have been busy moving planets.
I don't write about myself. Read it. Brukow. How to predict the dollar exchange rate
there are places where he posted predictions...better look them up first...
Market efficiency is quite different from machine efficiency.
I'm no good with formulas here too, but the impression is that the term was invented for investors / traders who are not too friendly with mathematics. Just to make it clearer for them.
There are three degrees of efficiency - weak, medium, strong. They all assert the impossibility of sustained profitable trading under different information constraints.
Probably efficiency is strictly defined through martingale, but I'm not sure. Yes, in fact, price as a martingale on this or that information set is precisely what determines this degree of efficiency.
Well, look here, Oleg. It is difficult to formalize information sets.
The situation regarding bots is as follows: the market is huge, there are enough manufacturers.
The result is warfare and plums - time to pick up the slack.
But it has to be said - small scalps at best.
Turkeys - the situation is brighter.
On TA - selection and oversampling of old turkeys (I wouldn't wish it on the enemy)
plus the modern ones also selected. We need a trained eye (or a trained mind).
Variety is the main problem, though in general it is surmountable, but I would not advise to start or stop.
Your settings.
The result is quite good builds, but patience is required.
Sitting on the fence is akin to art.
The whole process of improvement goes by steam train - you do not know what to grab hold of.
And you can't fit everything into one window.
So yes, a lot of work to get on your head.)
I think it's akin to digging through a rubbish bin for gold.
So yeah, it's a lot of work to get your head around.))
I think it's akin to digging through a rubbish bin looking for gold.
The whole history of gold fits into a D=23m ball
The entire history of gold fits into a D=23m ball
jelizavettka:
So, in all history, gold has been found as much as in a ball of D23m? ( Google didn't find....)
Think about it: did they need all that headache?
It's all for peaceful purposes, how many hectares of arable land and cubes of bricks.
If you haven't started, don't start - it's only 23m. Guess what, Google couldn't find it.
Those who have started it, don't abandon it, because it's a monopoly.
So, in all history, as much gold has been found as in ball D23m? ( Google didn't find.... )
All the gold mined by mankind would fit into a cube with an edge of about 17m
23 metres in diameter weighs about 127400 tonnes. The same ball of water weighs 6370 tonnes.
Lizanky, if you fill an ordinary kettle with 1.7 litres of gold, you won't lift it.
granit77: Все золото, добытое человечеством, уместилось бы в куб с ребром около 17 м
Well the difference is not that big - less than half (a cube of 17m is about 98260 tonnes).
23 metres in diameter weighs about 127400 tonnes. The same ball of water weighs 6370 tonnes.
Lizanka, if you fill an ordinary kettle with 1.7 litres of gold, you won't lift it.
She'll chew the pieces off of it.