where to go for a purchased robot that has lost its deposit - page 5
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
1) When you buy a car, the seller of the car does not give you any guarantee that you will be able to earn with this particular car by private haulage, this is not even up for discussion. Someone earns five times more than the haulage market, knowing where and at what time it is most efficient and less risky, someone at zero, someone in a drunken stupor bangs a car against a pole in a swathe. It's the same with an advisor.
2) The car manufacturer meets safety standards for the car, not for the way they make money from it. Same with EA, without verification it won't make it to the market.
3) It is always written in any DC/Broker that this activity involves the risk of losing your own funds, in the case of a prof participant you may still find yourself owed in the event of a negative balance. The description of entrepreneurial activity in the laws implies the risk of loss, all other laws around it are written to exclude cheating/fraud - i.e. ideally you only suffer loss as a result of market factors or force majeure, not as a result of your neighbour's naiopolis.
By implementing all the recommendations of the marketplace, the buyer has the ability to weed out out outright trash by 80%. Advisors regularly have the parameter acceptable risk/loss of deposit, there is no such parameter, ask the seller to add this parameter.
The most substantial guarantee is given by bonds of a couple of three countries at a yield of 2%+/-. The biggest guarantee is given by the Lord God: the mortality of existence and (perhaps) the immortality of the soul. Everything else is entrepreneurial activity with all the risks. And in general, be thankful that there is an opportunity to raise something from 100$ and not from 20000$.
1) When you buy a car, the seller of the car does not give you any guarantee that you will be able to earn with this particular car by private haulage, this is not even up for discussion. Someone earns five times more than the haulage market, knowing where and at what time it is most efficient and less risky, someone at zero, someone in a drunken stupor bangs a car against a pole in a swathe. It's the same with an advisor.
2) The car manufacturer meets safety standards for the car, not for the way they make money from it. Same with EA, without verification it won't make it to the market.
3) It is always written in any DC/Broker that this activity involves the risk of losing your own funds, in the case of a prof participant you may still find yourself owed in the event of a negative balance. The description of entrepreneurial activity in the laws implies the risk of loss, all other laws around it are written to exclude cheating/fraud - i.e. ideally you only suffer loss as a result of market factors or force majeure circumstances, not as a result of your neighbour's naiopolis.
By implementing all the recommendations of the marketplace, the buyer has the ability to weed out out outright trash by 80%. Advisors regularly have an acceptable risk/loss of deposit parameter, there is no such parameter, ask the seller to add this parameter.
The most substantial guarantee is given by bonds of a couple of three countries at a yield of 2%+/-. The biggest guarantee is given by the Lord God: the mortality of existence and (perhaps) the immortality of the soul. Everything else is entrepreneurial activity with all the risks. In fact, you should be grateful that you can raise something from $100, and not from $20000.
1.1 The purpose of the vehicle is to carry the asses of the driver and passengers and their loads. The entrepreneurial activity of the driver using the vehicle is not included in the specified technical specifications of the vehicle. The technical specifications are speed, acceleration, power at the stated load. If there is a discrepancy between the actual performance and the stated performance, the purchaser is entitled to make a claim.
1.2 The purpose of the Expert Advisor - trade operations in accordance with its algorithm, the algorithm is not published by the seller and can not be verified for compliance with the trading operations, so the seller declares the properties of the EA, such as profitability, etc., which are technical characteristics of the EA, whose direct purpose - to make money in accordance with the declared properties. If there is a discrepancy between the actual trading performance and the declared performance, the buyer has the right to file a claim.
2.0 See clauses 1.1. 1.1 и 1.2
3.0 Refer to par. 1.1 и 1.2
The description to the Expert Advisor should clearly include information that it is not guaranteed full compliance with the technical characteristics claimed (trading results) on the real-time data, indicate the date of the tests and the appropriate settings to enable the buyer to verify that the results obtained in the tester and the published results of the seller. Otherwise, the sale of the Expert Advisor may be regarded as fraud.
1.1 The purpose of the car is to carry the asses of the driver and passengers and their loads. The entrepreneurial activity of the driver using the car is not included in the stipulated technical specifications of the car. The technical specifications are speed, acceleration, power at the stated load. If there is a discrepancy between the actual performance and the stated performance, the purchaser is entitled to make a claim.
1.2 The purpose of the Expert Advisor - trading operations in accordance with its algorithm, the algorithm is not published by the seller and can not be checked for compliance with the trading operations, so the seller declares the properties of the EA, such as profitability and other, which are the technical characteristics of the EA, whose direct purpose - to earn in accordance with the declared properties. If there is a discrepancy between the actual trading performance and the declared performance, the buyer has the right to file a claim.
2.0 See clauses 1.1. 1.1 и 1.2
3.0 Refer to par. 1.1 и 1.2
The description to the Expert Advisor should clearly include information that it is not guaranteed full compliance with the technical characteristics claimed (trading results) on the real-time data, indicate the date of the tests and the appropriate settings to enable the buyer to verify that the results obtained in the tester and the published results of the seller. Otherwise, the sale of the Expert Advisor may be regarded as fraud.
Once again there is confusion. Everything you said is correct if the goods are purchased by a natural person for a purpose not related to entrepreneurial activity, which is clearly not our case. And in our case the Civil Code protects the buyer only if he can prove that the claimed algorithm differs from the actual, if certain, then forward, to the beginning of the official examination of the goods (at the expense of the buyer, by the way). By the way, something tells me that the expert's response will be something like the following: "in connection with the absence of source codes, it is not possible to unequivocally answer the questions posed to the examination". In our case, this answer is in favour of the seller. Only a court can force him, or Mql, to provide open source code for examination. So, welcome to the courts for six months to a year, and as I wrote before, this whole site, as far as I understand, is under the jurisdiction of the Republic of Cyprus, so our legislation does not dance here.
Therefore, the seller declares EA properties, such as profitability and other, which are technical characteristics of the EA, the direct purpose of which is to earn in accordance with the declared properties. If the real trading performance does not match the declared - the buyer has the right to file claims.
Not to earn, but to act in accordance with the description / algorithm (the algorithm is inherent in any program, even in the core of the operating system, and no one is obliged to publish the source code). But that does not say that it is a printing press.
Not to make money, but to perform actions in accordance with the description/algorithm (any program has an algorithm, and no one is obliged to publish its source code, even in the OS kernel). But that does not mean that it is a printing press.
Again, there is confusion. Everything you said is correct, if the goods are purchased by a natural person for a purpose not related to entrepreneurial activity, which is clearly not our case. And in our case, the Civil Code protects the buyer only if he can prove that the declared algorithm differs from the actual, if you are sure, then go ahead, for starters, for an official examination of the goods (at the expense of the buyer, by the way). By the way, something tells me that the expert's response will be something like the following: "In the absence of source codes, it is not possible to clearly answer the questions posed to the examination". In our case, this answer is in favour of the seller. Only a court can force him, or Mql, to provide open source code for examination. So, welcome to the courts for six months to a year, and as I wrote before, this whole site, as far as I understand, is under the jurisdiction of the Republic of Cyprus, so our legislation does not dance here.
There is no confusion. Read what is written in my post in highlighted font.
1.1 The purpose of a car is to carry the asses of the driver and passengers and their loads. The entrepreneurial activity of the driver using the car is not included in the specifications of the car. The technical specifications are speed, acceleration, power at the stated load. If there is a discrepancy between the actual performance and the stated performance, the purchaser is entitled to make a claim.
1.2 The purpose of the Expert Advisor - trading operations in accordance with its algorithm, the algorithm is not published by the seller and can not be checked for compliance with trading operations, so the seller declares the properties of the Expert Advisor, such as profitability and other, which are technical characteristics of the Expert Advisor, whose direct purpose - to earn in accordance with the declared properties. If there is a discrepancy between the actual trading performance and the declared performance, the buyer has the right to file a claim.
2.0 See clauses 1.1. 1.1 и 1.2
3.0 Refer to par. 1.1 и 1.2
The description to the Expert Advisor should clearly include information that it is not guaranteed full compliance with the technical characteristics claimed (trading results) on the real-time data, indicate the date of the tests and the appropriate settings to enable the buyer to verify that the results obtained in the tester and the published results of the seller. Otherwise - the sale of the adviser can be construed as fraud.
An Expert Advisor is not a standalone product:
1) There is a DC/Broker which already has rules, which do not violate the laws of the country of operation. These rules prescribe the risk of losing client funds, and the client has agreed to these rules.
2) The metatron platform is not a DC/Broker, it is provided to the DCs/Brokers to carry out activities.
3) If the client wants to use metatron, be my guest, here are the frills for all tastes. Don't want or don't like it, order it in sharpe or java or make your own strategy in an explicit builder (or whatever they have).
4) All descriptions are contained in the offers the customer accepts. It is forbidden to specify profitability guarantees in the rules of product placement in the marketplace, if such things are found, the client is obliged to leave a complaint/violation.
5) The marketplace and metatron manual contains a description of how to work with the strategy tester. Do I have to dance and titillate in front of the client?
If anyone has a problem with logic, it is unlikely that lawyers in this industry do.
I wish you would take your fervour to other countries.
You need an algorithm - order it by TOR for freelancing. If you do not like it, there is API.
There is no confusion. Read what is written in my post in highlighted font.
Link to the relevant paragraph of the law or regulation, please.
Have you tried googling?
The advisor is not an independent product:
1) There is a DC/Broker that already has rules that do not violate the laws of the country of operation. These rules prescribe the risk of losing client funds, and the client has agreed to these rules.
2) The metatron platform is not a DC/Broker, it is provided to the DCs/Brokers to carry out activities.
3) If the client wants to use metatron, be my guest, here are the frills for every taste. Don't want or don't like it, order it in sharpe or java or make your own strategy in an explicit builder (or whatever they have).
4) All descriptions are contained in the offers the customer accepts. It is forbidden to specify profitability guarantees in the rules of product placement in the marketplace, if such things are found, the client is obliged to leave a complaint/infringement.
5) The marketplace and metatron manual contains a description of how to work with the strategy tester. Do I have to dance and titillate in front of the client?
If anyone has a problem with logic, it is unlikely that lawyers in this industry do.
Your fervour should be exported to other countries.
You need an algorithm, order it by your TOR from a freelancer. If you do not like it, there is API.
Do not confuse the terms.
The broker, the meta-quotas, the products in the marketplace - there are rules and agreements for all of these, and you are mixing things up by substituting one for the other.