Thoughts on the random - page 9
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
http://odessa.kp.ua/daily/180112/320442/
nor http://www.findpatent.ru/patent/225/2258625.html
Comrade, before you invent, look for the original.
This is different. Yusuf has aluminium rims.
http://odessa.kp.ua/daily/180112/320442/
and http://www.findpatent.ru/patent/225/2258625.html
Comrade, before inventing, look for the original.
1. I kept the chain in place.
2. The cable connected the 2 pedals via a roller so that the pedals would rise automatically when one of them was lowered.
3. The gears were on both sides.
4. Both gears were driven "forwards" and moved idly when turning backwards, like in sports bikes.
5. When shifting, it would quickly, on the go, turn into a regular bike.
So, the differences are significant.
And how many thousands of trades in total? And over what period of time?
How many do you need? I gave an estimate.
If there are 10,000 trades on the history, then the longest continuous series with a 50% probability will be at least 12.
Returning to my topic, I play a game called Pipes, where pipes are connected to make water flow.
On an 8 x 8 figure screen, I solve the puzzle in an average of 1.5 minutes. Of the 64 pieces, about 50 can be oriented in 4 different directions, and 14 (long sleepers) in two directions. That makes a total of (4 ^ 50) * (2 ^ 14) = 2 ^ 114 configurations. If I go through 2 configurations in a second, that means I'm running through 180 * 2 = 360 variations. That is, by my actions I cover 2 ^ -105.5th of the state space and find a single correct answer. I just know the algorithm ) It's not a miracle, I don't think about probability at all when I play.
Same in the market, most likely: if you know the algorithm, you can come up with the right answer in quite human time, using quite affordable means of calculation. I had previously thought that brute-force couldn't crack the algorithm simply because of the near-zero probability of finding a marginally acceptable solution. It makes no sense. You have to look for an algorithm. Full stop. The proof is complete. I'm going for a walk :)
Returning to my topic, I play a game called Pipes, where pipes are connected to make water flow.
On an 8 x 8 figure screen, I solve the puzzle in an average of 1.5 minutes. Of the 64 pieces, about 50 can be oriented in 4 different directions, and 14 (long sleepers) in two directions. That makes a total of (4 ^ 50) * (2 ^ 14) = 2 ^ 114 configurations. If I go through 2 configurations in a second, that means I'm running through 180 * 2 = 360 variations. That is, by my actions I cover 2 ^ -105.5th of the state space and find the only correct answer. I just know the algorithm ) It's not a miracle, I don't think about probability at all when I play.
Same in the market, most likely: if you know the algorithm, you can come up with the right answer in quite human time, using quite affordable means of calculation. I had previously thought that brute-force couldn't crack the algorithm simply because of the near-zero probability of finding a marginally acceptable solution. It makes no sense. You have to look for an algorithm. Full stop. The proof is complete. I'm going for a walk :)
I agree (with a caveat) by analogy with chess, where the tree of variants also grows enormously fast.
Nevertheless squirrel chess players (grandmasters) trying a limited number of variants for a very long time were unattainable for machines in spite of huge speed of the latter.
I don't follow it now, but I heard that machines are ahead now, but not so much due to speed, but due to new algorithms.
I don't know how accurate the parallelism is.
Returning to my topic, I play a game called Pipes, where pipes are connected to make water flow.
On an 8 x 8 figure screen, I solve the puzzle in an average of 1.5 minutes. Of the 64 pieces, about 50 can be oriented in 4 different directions, and 14 (long sleepers) in two directions. That makes a total of (4 ^ 50) * (2 ^ 14) = 2 ^ 114 configurations. If I go through 2 configurations in a second, that means I'm running through 180 * 2 = 360 variations. That is, by my actions I cover 2 ^ -105.5th of the state space and find a single correct answer. I just know the algorithm ) It's not a miracle, I don't think about probability at all when I play.
Same in the market, most likely: if you know the algorithm, you can come up with the right answer in quite human time, using quite affordable means of calculation. I had previously thought that brute-force couldn't crack the algorithm simply because of the near-zero probability of finding a marginally acceptable solution. It makes no sense. You have to look for an algorithm. Full stop. The proof is complete. I'm going for a walk :)
And market makers - do not agree with you ;-)
... And will move the quotes in such a way that there is no pattern in them... (good thing I didn't know how to write this BEFORE your walk, or I would have ruined the whole mood...)
And market makers - disagree with you ;-)
... and will move the quotes in such a way that there is no pattern to them... (good thing I didn't know how to write that BEFORE your walk, or I would have spoiled the whole mood...)
I've heard it 100 times already, it doesn't spoil the mood, don't worry
:)
I've seen what is the flow of quotes from different providers (Renat showed on the 5). Some indignations will add to the kitchen, but we're not talking about 5-point movements. I'm interested in 50-100 pips. Minimum one hour resolution.
How many do you need? I gave an estimated value.
If there are 10,000 trades on the history, then the longest continuous series with a 50% probability will be at least 12.
The more the better. That is, there is a higher probability that you can benefit from it. ))
The more the better. That is, it is more likely that you can benefit from it. ))