My approach. The core is the engine. - page 119
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
Another example of an "unnecessary" thing that was made by people but does not fulfil their needs ?
Go to aliexpress or better yet joom. It's full of them there :)
Go on aliexpress, or better still, joom. It's full of them:)
I don't see any. They all fulfill some important need. Say, the same iPhone, being able to do a little more than what my penny Dexp can do - costs more than an order (!!!) more. Would you say it is a waste of money? No way! It's payment for the realisation of a need for significance.
Here's a joke:
- What do you have to do to find out if someone has an iPhone ?
- Nothing. He will tell you within the first five minutes of the conversation.
- It's strange... I have an Oiphone and I don't tell anyone about it...
Your GUI builder is primarily for YOU. And it fulfils your important need (the same need that my TC League fulfils) - the need for significance. To put it simply, it "amuses your ego".
Another example of an "unnecessary" thing that was made by people but doesn't fulfil their need ?
Everyone can give you lots of examples of necessary and unnecessary things. Everything is subjective.
Necessity is a subjective notion. And subjectivity is changeable. And you see necessity only from an objective point of view. That's a mistake.
Everyone can give you plenty of examples of things you need and don't need. Everything is subjective.
Necessity is subjective. And subjectivity is changeable. And you view it only from an objective point of view. That's a mistake.
Necessity is an objective concept. The thing you need is the thing that fulfills your need.
I'm trying to find at least one "unnecessary" thing.
Say, a boulder lying on some beach is an unnecessary thing, it does not fulfill anyone's needs. However, if a tourist happens to be near, and he will need (FOR THE FIRST TIME!!!) a stone to hammer a peg - this boulder will immediately (AFTER that!!!) appear to be needed.
That is to say, the need always appears FIRST - and only then will the thing be needed. And you, Peter, are trying to make the thing first so that it will become necessary to someone afterwards. But it doesn't work that way. Either someone needs the thing right away, or it happens to "hit the target" and its need coincides with someone else's need, or no one will need the thing.
In my opinion, your library is only needed by you. As I have repeatedly said, those participants, who are good at programming but prefer to trade manually, would also need it. Those participants need your library. They already have a need, which the library can fulfil. However, I don't see such participants. Who else needs the library - I can't say. You claim to "create a need" ??? Well, well... go ahead, let's see how you do it.
Peter, you made one strategic mistake. The same mistake I made. In 2014-2015, when my colleagues were churning out dough on the falling ruble, I made a hedge panel for MT5 instead. I thought it would be a solution for many, if not all, MT5 users (what's the point of having an EOI). However, I didn't understand the main thing at that time: users don't need technology, they need a ready-made solution for their specific tasks. 10 months of hard work and the release of my samovar was enough for me to understand this. I would have given a lot to read this post of mine in 2014, and I'm giving you this opportunity for free, appreciate it, be able to benefit from the experience of other people's mistakes.
What about MT? What about MQLs?
How did MQ manage to woo the crowds with trading robots that they have to create themselves? Have to learn a complicated language. Work hard...
How did MQ do it?
MQ provided a wide range of tools for people to work and create. And convinced people that you can make money in the market with robots.
Note - there was no Market at the time. Everyone was trading manually. You had to convince people to create trading robots. Learn the language, write programs, learn the platform...
Think about how much hard work and persistence was required of the user.
But, their success is evident. They achieved it. Although, according to your logic, this is not possible at all. After all, users only want a ready-made solution...
So there is a mistake in your conclusion. And so is George's conclusion.
Both of you are missing something. And probably a lot of things...
What about MT? What about MQLs?
How did MQ manage to woo the crowds with trading robots that they have to create themselves? Have to learn a complicated language. Work hard...
How did MQ do it?
MQ provided a wide range of tools for people to work and create. And convinced people that you can make money in the market with robots.
Note - there was no Market at the time. Everyone was trading manually. You had to convince people to create trading robots. Learn the language, write programs, learn the platform...
Think about how much hard work and persistence was required of the user.
But, their success is evident. They achieved it. Although, according to your logic, this is not possible at all. After all, users only want a ready-made solution...
So there is a mistake in your conclusion. And so is George's conclusion.
Both of you are missing something. And probably a lot of things...
Just the need to create robots was a long time ago. As if it wasn't already in the 50s, when computer technology was just taking its first steps.
By 2000 - there were already many people who wanted to create trading robots. That's why MetaTrader - and 'went'.
Just the need to create robots has been around for a very long time. As if it wasn't already in the 1950s, when computer technology was just taking its first steps.
By the year 2000 - there were already many people who wanted to create trading robots. That's why MetaTrader - and "went".
Exactly, George! THE NEED TO CREATE.
It's eternal. Give a person the opportunity to realise THEIR thought and it will come to you.
I offer a toolkit for the wide implementation of OWN thoughts, ideas. So, I am playing on the main need of man, - to be the Creator.
And MQ played and play on this need.
By the way, "usefulness" is actually "use value" in terms of economic theory.
Well, Peter, your library has no use value. And I'm sure you don't have the resources to "tie" that value to some natural human need (which is how use value is created by industry giants).
There would be people who, knowing how to program, prefer to trade hands, yet are rich enough to treat an expert as a toy, and are not afraid to drain funds - your library would find its consumer.
That's right George! THE NEED TO CREATE.
It's eternal. Give a person the opportunity to realise THEIR thought and it will come to you.
I offer a toolkit for the broad realization of OWN thoughts, ideas. So, I am playing on man's main need, which is to be a Creator.
I agree, most people have that need. However, again - where are the people with this REALIZED need here ? I don't see them. Say, I - my need to create through the League. Vaughn, above, Vasily told me about his hedge panel, and I'm sure that this panel, among other things, fulfilled his need for creativity. All the other participants are also quite a field in which they fulfil that need.
For a person to take up your library - he must want to "create something new", and again - in the field of manual trade, that is, he must prefer manual trade. Where are such people? There are none ! Of the forum users, most likely no one needs it, each of them ALREADY creates something of their own.