Looking for patterns - page 3

 
Vitaliy Maznev:
In terms of losses, it is probably the most sober decision in our field to clearly understand their probability and limit the risks. This is, in my opinion, the key point.

Here, yes, I agree. After all, this limitation means risking a small amount with possible small gains. And it rules out a vertical skyrocket, the odds of which are a lucky few in a few billion inhabitants.

 
Vitaliy Maznev:

The initial setup is already set up in such a way that the ultimate beneficiaries are clearly defined. So that at least you don't have to worry about why some toddler easily achieves what it takes you years to achieve to no avail. :)

I don't quite understand your last phrases. Can you explain in more detail?

 

So far our conversation has been more philosophical, which is not a bad thing. But I'd like everyone to draw their own graph and write what I see it as and why. More specifics, less general judgements about the meaning of being, and short lines, the benefits of which cannot be applied. Isn't it interesting, don't you know everything?

 
Aleksei Stepanenko:

I don't quite understand your last phrases. Can you explain it more clearly?

You, like me and many others, are in the sphere as a guest. This sphere was not created and worked up from the beginning to be divided equally in proportion to one's abilities. And no matter how hard you try, your success depends not so much on the qualities mentioned in your previous post, but on how you correspond to a trend as its element. And such variants of conformity are not discussed with anyone and it is impossible to predict them or artificially provoke. At the end of the day, the final beneficiaries receive no less than their given amount of profit. And the rest is distributed virtually randomly. And here it really is much more advantageous to be a young girl who doesn't rack her brains with pattern analysis, because she has many more chances. But you're going to go the other way, right? :)

 
Aleksei Stepanenko:

So far our conversation has been more philosophical, which is not a bad thing. But I'd like everyone to draw their own graph and write what I see it as and why. More specifics, less general judgements about the meaning of being, and short lines that can't be applied. Isn't it interesting, don't you know everything?

That's what I was talking about in the beginning, by the way. If you start to get to the root of it, the mind sees it as a general philosophy with no practical value. Practical value, on the other hand, is in the details of the bin, which you can tip over and then feel and even apply its contents. :)

 
Vitaliy Maznev:

That, by the way, is what I was talking about in the beginning.

Vitaly, it's impossible to apply this content

 
Aleksei Stepanenko:

Vitaly, it's impossible to apply this content

Glad you came to this, Alexei. It didn't even take much time and text. So the balls of success are practically in the palm of your hand.

 
Vitaliy Maznev:

I'm glad you came to this.

You're an interesting conversationalist, a bottle is missing

 
Aleksei Stepanenko:

You're an interesting conversationalist, a bottle is missing.

Likewise. About the bottle, if you only knew how much I miss it :)

 
Three whole pages of patterns. :)
Reason: