Question! Do the developers of robots (Expert Advisors) trade themselves? - page 4
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
But as soon as you switch to a real account it starts hiccuping, then the spread does not take into account the commission, then the swap, then it opens without understanding how.)
Many people talk about some stability and 5% a month, though they forget that most people simply do not have much capital. And one of the main rules of Forex: risk with money you do not feel sorry for.
Do you have a lot of money to spare?
This is not an exchange with millions. People come in with a hundred to five hundred dollars and try to squeeze the maximum out of it by taking risks. The point of doing 5%, which will go to pay for internet, utilities and a bottle of soda.
Obviously, the 5% is for those who have a decent deposit. And not just a loan taken out, a car sold, but precisely for other reasons, when in addition to this capital there is the same but under another bed.
That is why most of them are justified in taking the risk of loss: either you manage to raise it to a decent size and smoothly move to lower risk, or you sell it. The point here is to get pennies.
What if you treat it like a business, reinvesting all the money you earn? I decided to make an experiment, opened a signal and subscribed to it, thanks to my signal subscription is free. I am going to invest all earned profit + subscribers into my account, signed to the signal. Let's see how much earned in 3 years.
Do you want a programmer to write a robot and use it himself? Is that too much to ask of the poor programmer? Let everyone go about his business!
Do you want a programmer to write a robot and use it himself? Is that too much to ask of the poor programmer? Let everyone mind his own business !
Disagree. Strongly disagree.
A programmer and a developer are not the same thing. A programmer may not be a developer, just as a developer may not be a programmer. But a developer is always a trader, whether he is a programmer or not.
If he is not a trader, he cannot be a good developer.
There are coders on this site who already have more than a hundred products. These guys are theoreticians - their products are good only for running in the tester. Theoretically, they are developers, and very cool ones, because they have hundreds of trading robots. But what kind of developers they are, designed to make tester or at best demo money )))).
So you can call them developers with a HUGE HUGE stretch.
They did some freelance work. Gathered ideas from those. Re-face the bots. And then you're off to market. Notice, not the market, but the market.
So it is true developers trade, and just coders do not.
I disagree. I fundamentally disagree.
A programmer and a developer are not the same thing. A programmer may not be a developer, just as a developer may not be a programmer. But a developer is always a trader, whether he is a programmer or not.
If he is not a trader, he cannot be a good developer.
There are coders on this site who already have more than a hundred products. These guys are theoreticians - their products are good only for running in the tester. Theoretically, they are developers, and very cool ones, because they have hundreds of trading robots. But what kind of developers they are, designed to make tester or at best demo money )))).
So developers they can be called with a HUGE HUGE HUGE.
They worked as freelancers. They collected ideas from those who were there. They redesigned bots. And off we go - to market. Note, not the market, but the market.
So it is true developers trade, and just coders do not.
But those who need something exclusive and only they have thought of. They will always find a normal programmer and order what they want.
Do you want a programmer to write a robot and use it himself? Is that too much to ask of the poor programmer? Let everyone mind his own business!
Does that mean that the cobbler walks barefoot?
Another thing is that there is nothing to trade, the seller has more than 100 products on sale, and you think that out of 100 there is at least one profitable one that deserves his attention? It is difficult to write one sensible one so that he earns at least for himself, or 100 more and that's it ...
If you open the tab at the seller, you see that more than 3 products and no signal on sales robots - you can safely close this scam and look for more.
Do you want a programmer to write a robot and use it himself? Is that too much to ask of the poor programmer? Let everyone mind his own business !
I'll add:
At night I got an e-mail from a very famous community and it advertises a robot that only people who are deaf and blind or don't have internet access haven't heard of and haven't seen.
There's a whole community out there, over 5,000 people. So, the whole point is that the first robot appeared around 2012 with version 1.1, and now version 3.2.1, it is constantly being updated and improved, and there is only ONE robot. I will not tell you the name even in person - it is not decent.
And you say one seller has 100 bots :)
I don't agree. I fundamentally disagree.
A programmer and a developer are not the same thing. A programmer may not be a developer, just as a developer may not be a programmer. But a developer is always a trader, programmer or not.
If he is not a trader, he cannot be a good developer.
There are coders on this site who already have more than a hundred products. These guys are theoreticians - their products are good only for running in the tester. Theoretically, they are developers, and very cool ones, because they have hundreds of trading robots. But what kind of developers they are, designed to make tester or at best demo money )))).
So you can call them developers with a HUGE HUGE stretch.
They worked on freelancing. Gathered ideas from those who do not know. Redesigned their bots. And then you're off to market. Notice, not the market, but the market.
So it is true developers trade, and just coders do not.
I agree with Boris.
Without trading there is no development. What's more, normal robots only come out with time, in real-world use. New ideas come and old ones die out. And you end up with a product that may be fundamentally different from the original design. If you don't trade, you just snatch an idea somewhere and put it into your code and that's all. You don't know how it will behave on the market. Only the buyer will know, and perhaps not at once)))
To add:
I received an email last night from a very well-known community advertising a robot that only those who are deaf and blind or don't have internet access have not heard of or seen.
There's a whole community there, over 5000 people. So, the whole point is that the first robot appeared around 2012 with version 1.1, and now version 3.2.1, it is constantly being updated and improved, and there is only ONE robot. I will not tell you the name even in person - it is not decent.
And you say one seller has 100 bots :)
Exactly.
I do not understand how you can lead more than 10 bots!
I don't have enough time to lead "2 robots" and a dozen utilities. What to say about mass marketplace attack with new ones (5-20 new bots each day). .... ok utilities : Algorhythm runs ok, just add new functionality. But bots? that's a total bummer. Constantly checking it on reals to rule out errors. .......
I have no idea, maybe it's a team effort?
The very problem of "STABILIZING" is optimal and correct... But, having a mechanism for STABLE trading, stopping at 5-7% is not right...
You just need to refine this mechanism to the maximum possible result, e.g. 15-25% or even more, if this mechanism can allow...
15-25% is certainly better than 5-7%, but to achieve such an increase in one strategy without increasing the risk does not work, and the larger the increase in risk, the stronger the mechanism decreases "stability". Rather, you need to introduce some new ideas in the strategy, but it will be another mechanism.