The market has become a dumping ground - page 7
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
Just read the forum, use the forum search engine. It's discussed every month. Or even every week.
I haven't. All right.
I haven't. All right.
Here's something like this, for example.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/241118
How wonderful!
You have enough (to draw conclusions) representative statistics on the use of bots with complex mathematical algorithms to process information and make trading decisions!
Please provide me with the data of these statistics.
Yes, we need to go back three years. When I was developing this very bot with a complex algorithm.
But what is there to object to? If you think I'm wrong, use bots with complicated mathematics and we'll see who earns more.
Yes, you have to go back three years. When I was developing this very bot with a complex algorithm.
But what's there to object to? (1) You think I'm wrong - so use bots with complex mathematics and we'll see who earns more.
(1) You don't count, son, but you do.
(2) Use, you're welcome, to solve the daunting task of profitable stock market trading robots with school maths. That is your right.
(1) I don't count, son, but you do.
(2) Use, cheers, to solve the daunting task of profitable stock market trading robots with high school maths. That's your right.
Let's be on a first-name basis, mate... Are you really 30 years older than I am, so that you can "tell each other off"?
Here, I want to see the results of these very "bots with complex mathematics" - even in real life, even in the tester. I bet that the simplest bots will work just as well. And then what is the point of all this complexity?
Let's be on a first-name basis, mate...(1) Are you really 30 years older than me?
So, I want to see the results of these very "bots with complex mathematics", in real life or in the tester. I bet that the simplest bots would work just as well. And then what is the point of all this complexity?
(1) From the way you write, it seems so. Anyway, I'm already retired, which doesn't seem to be a threat to you.
And I'm used to being treated correctly.
(1) From the way you write, it seems so. At any rate, I am already retired, which you don't seem to be in danger of.
And I am used to being treated correctly.
And I'm retired, bro! It's not like I was insulting... And "you" is too distant...
Let's be on a first-name basis, mate... Are you really 30 years older than I am, so that you can "tell each other off"?
Here, I'd like to see the results of these "bots with complex mathematics" - in real life or in the tester, at least. I bet that the simplest bots will work just as well. And then the point of all this complexity?
The simplest bots are unlikely to work well. But overcomplicating, after a certain level, also makes no sense. The latter can even be justified).
And the complexity of the design matrix is not directly related to the complexity of the resulting PBX.
What are you "you" smearing snot like a sourpuss. (1) Come on, show me your complicated and profitable algorithm, while you're at it.
(2) I personally cringe inside when people with +/- 15 years age difference call me "you".
(1) I'll put it on the market and make a description in the blog - we'll discuss it as much as we want.
(2) It's a matter of upbringing here, personally I'm disgusted when people poke me. And when I taught mathematics at the institute, I even addressed all the students as you.
(1) I'll put it on the market, make a description in the blogs - we'll discuss it as much as we want.
(2) This is a question of education; personally, I am disgusted when people poke me. And when I taught mathematics at the institute I even addressed all the students as "You".
But this is not an institute. And you're not a teacher at the moment. And "you" is even friendlier.