Apophenia - page 12

New comment
 
Renat Akhtyamov:

he answered it there.

So the post is a question and then the answer

However, it is not true, the price does not just walk on eggshells, the price is moved oddly enough by our money and only our money

Yes it's all understandable, only the output or the graph turns out to be the same crap, as if it was moved by accident (or almost accidentally). Anyway, for those who just look at the graph alone, that's how it turns out.

 
Aleksey Ivanov:

Yes it is all clear, only on the output or on the chart you get the same bullshit, as if it was moved by chance (or almost by chance). Anyway, for those who just look at the chart alone it turns out that way.

it is not almost random, not accidental, but a tool to manage the trader's funds that fits best

but the 95%/5% formula does work, it's not all bad

 
Renat Akhtyamov:
The most suitable is not almost random, not random, but the control element of the trader's means

What I meant was the following. Here is a program using pseudo-random bar generation algorithms to generate some sort of quote histories. We do not know these algorithms and when we look at these charts, they are treated as random (or, if one has a rich imagination, one can see some elements of regularities there, build models, etc., but one is in captivity of an illusion).

The graphs of quotations that appear as a result of clashes of different interests of a great number of people, knowing all these interests, are also not accidental. But we do not know the whole set of these interests, so for us the charts are also generated randomly (it turns out as well, as by some algorithm of pseudorandom number generation).

Well yes, these random processes control the means of the trader for us, but this is a consequence of all that has been stated.

 
Aleksey Ivanov:

What I meant was the following. Here is a program using pseudo-random bar generation algorithms to generate some sort of quote histories. We do not know these algorithms and when we look at these charts, they are treated as random (or, if someone has a rich imagination, he sees there elements of laws, builds models, etc., but he is in captivity of an illusion).

The graphs of quotations that appear as a result of clashes of different interests of a great number of people, knowing all these interests, are also not accidental. But we do not know the whole set of these interests, that is why the charts are also generated randomly for us (it turns out the same way as by some algorithm of pseudorandom number generation).

Well yes, these random processes control the trader's funds for us, but this is a consequence of all the above.

The price won't randomly go if the real is being traded

How can you look at and compare a randomly generated quotient with one that resulted in an investment, it's heaven and earth?

 
Tomorrow I will upload here the candlestick and volatility generator just like the market one randomly in Excel ;)
 
Martin CHEguevara:
Tomorrow I will send here the candlestick generator and volatility exactly like in the market ;)

If the graph matches the real one, it's definitely worth it.

No way, it won't work

And since you're a statistician, try to see how many times you get a perfect match.

each subsequent attempt will reduce the usefulness of generating such a chart by half

 
Vladimir Baskakov:
I do not think it was that simple. There were successful ones. There were candles, bars.
Well... There was a tape recorder with price changes, people just made charts on a grid on paper. But of course nobody could calculate then what was real and what was not.
Almost no one has made a cent from that analysis yet. Because it simply does not exist in the form in which it is currently devised. And all the winnings are just luck - not a pattern.
Why Cheaters? It's very simple:
During the day, they made transactions in the trading pit, of course these transactions were not in a computer, but on the papers. And at the end of the day summing up and pouring profits into the account or writing off losses from the accounts. Of course it was a trader who decided where to write off losses and, what was more important, where to put the profit:) because one account was quietly divided into two and one was emptied, while the other was making hundreds of percent profit.
 
Renat Akhtyamov:


but the 95%/5% formula is still working, it's not all bad

I'm not saying it's all bad. The problem, in my opinion, is solved by creating filters that can, against an interfering background of indiscriminate small price shocks, identify strong influences and estimate the characteristic movement times of the price subjected to such influences.

 
Renat Akhtyamov:

If the graph matches the real one, it's definitely worth it.

No, you won't.

and since you're a statistician, try to see how many times you get a perfect match.

each subsequent attempt will reduce the usefulness of generating such a graph by half

Randomness does not coincide if anything ;)that's why history does not repeat itself) but come on, how much more to tell. I think everyone who wants to understand the situation understood me a long time ago.
 
Renat Akhtyamov:

the price will not go by chance if the real is traded

How can you look at and compare a randomly generated quote with one that resulted in an investment, which is heaven and earth?

Well, if you know exactly who invested when, where and how much, then of course you cannot compare.
1...5678910111213141516171819...31
New comment
Reason: