Finally, came to a conclusion on Algos!

[jammy1337]

Well, with some deep thinking , i realised that algos wont change the patterns that we have become accustomed to, they wont manipulate the markets, simply because: the reason they were created was to profit from the patterns that were already there in the first place! All this means is that the markets could have a f*** load more volume! No machine can create the market, it will have to work with it, and i realised, what if fear or greed changes? how will the algo fit in then? Humans can adapt well-algorithms can't, of course they can make new ones-but for the same reasons- to profit from the patterns that were already there in the first place!

Also, to those worrying about the 'death of the trader' , the only people who will be 'dying' will be those in wall street, wworkin as a trader in a hedge fund, etc,etc. While day traders wont be replaced by machines.:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

 

[jiggly]

what if fear or greed changes? :

fear and greed will not change unless you can reprogram that which is hardwired into the human psych, that of millions of years worth of evolution that has served the purpose for the survival of your genes.

emotions dont change, but their intensities do vary.

 

[TAjammy]

well you get my point though

 

[N Rothschild]

sorry to rain on your parade but patterns have very little to do with trading...

 

[Calinor]

That has to be one of the worst posts you've ever made genics.

Patterns are everything. A pattern doesn't have to be head and shoulders. It might be an uptrend or a downtrend. It might be that price bounces off support, or that it blows through support when there is an important news release. Everything is patterns. If you're not trading on a pattern, whether that be price action, news or even some indicator like stochastics then you're just trading randomly. A trading plan itself must be built on some pattern.

 

[TAjammy]

half true, half wrong. some but not all Patterns are a good way to trade,that is a fact.

 

[N Rothschild]

im talking about common chart paterns mate, as he has gone on about in his other posts..h's wedges, box plays etc etc

 

[N Rothschild]

also your asuming the person is even looking at a chart...technical analsys is not the only way to trade, i rely less and less on my charts these days

 

[megamuel]

half true, half wrong. some but not all Patterns are a good way to trade,that is a fact.

Which ones are good then?

 

[Depth Trade]

The market will always be dominated by a man relaxing on a 120' yaht, sipping on a Mai'Tai, while watching his wife soaking up the rays half naked on the deck.

Nobody in there right mind would have all his hard work coded into a program that could be back-engineered and make him obsolete.
Even if someone was dumb enough to code a strategy, that in it's self could eventually drown out the strategy.
Anything man made can be pre-emptified, so algos in themselves represent a potential weakness. If you have thousands of programs trading out the market, you already know what it's going to do.

A.I. is total Bu ll Sht, if someone came up with a cpu intelligent enough to trade, it would make the same mistakes and they would be back at 'square one'.
The theory for the advancements of program trading are moronic.

There's no logic that holds true for them or people's reasons to advance them.

 

[Mathemagician]

The market will always be dominated by a man relaxing on a 120' yaht, sipping on a Mai'Tai, while watching his wife soaking up the rays half naked on the deck.

Nobody in there right mind would have all his hard work coded into a program that could be back-engineered and make him obsolete.
Even if someone was dumb enough to code a strategy, that in it's self could eventually drown out the strategy.
Anything man made can be pre-emptified, so algos in themselves represent a potential weakness. If you have thousands of programs trading out the market, you already know what it's going to do.

A.I. is total Bu ll Sht, if someone came up with a cpu intelligent enough to trade, it would make the same mistakes and they would be back at 'square one'.
The theory for the advancements of program trading are moronic.

There's no logic that holds true for them or people's reasons to advance them.

Awesome! Just friggin' awesome! :clap:

 

[Technically Fundamental]

The market will always be dominated by a man relaxing on a 120' yaht, sipping on a Mai'Tai, while watching his wife soaking up the rays half naked on the deck.

Nobody in there right mind would have all his hard work coded into a program that could be back-engineered and make him obsolete.
Even if someone was dumb enough to code a strategy, that in it's self could eventually drown out the strategy.
Anything man made can be pre-emptified, so algos in themselves represent a potential weakness. If you have thousands of programs trading out the market, you already know what it's going to do.

A.I. is total Bu ll Sht, if someone came up with a cpu intelligent enough to trade, it would make the same mistakes and they would be back at 'square one'.
The theory for the advancements of program trading are moronic.

There's no logic that holds true for them or people's reasons to advance them.

So you dont think a 60 year old trading legend would help develop an algorithm in exchange for a ridiculous "bonus"?

 

[robster970]

Algo trading affects the behaviour of the market through it's own actions. Algo will be parameterised to work under certain conditions only. Market behaviour changes over time so algo becomes redundant. Requires new algo.

AI is a computational method, not anything to do with sentience. AI computation has the ability to adapt but first it must learn and secondly it must be tuned during it's learning phase. Self tuning AI is beyond our technological capability right now. We're still struggling with simple forms of AI.

Machines may be good at pattern recognition. They are bad at context though and it's context that makes all the difference and gives humans an edge.

Ergo human traders will always have a place until machinery achieves sentience.

 

[Technically Fundamental]

Self tuning AI is beyond our technological capability right now.

You don't sound like a conspiracy buff at all. I'm unimpressed.

 

[GladiatorX]

You heard about the algos that can predict the future with 98% certaincy?... They're coming... Be prepared.

 

[GladiatorX]

also your asuming the person is even looking at a chart...technical analsys is not the only way to trade, i rely less and less on my charts these days

What do you rely on now then? News, algos, fundamentals

 

[robster970]

You don't sound like a conspiracy buff at all. I'm unimpressed.

Unless of course I am lying to you all because I really know the truth.......

Aren't conspiraloons great.........

 

[robster970]

You heard about the algos that can predict the future with 98% certaincy?... They're coming... Be prepared.

I heard that they predicted with 98% certainty that there was a future...........

 

[GladiatorX]

I heard that they predicted with 98% certainty that there was a future...........

91% actually, unknown to general society - Only to a select few of super humans North Korea fired nuclear bombs with the intent to explode the entire world... Forunately i was able to catch it with one arm and blow up Pluto (hence why is it no longer a 'planet')... The algos knew this could occur and therefore their certainty was only 91%, i was insulted they would doubt me even that much

 

[robster970]

91% actually, unknown to general society - Only to a select few of super humans North Korea fired nuclear bombs with the intent to explode the entire world... Forunately i was able to catch it with one arm and blow up Pluto (hence why is it no longer a 'planet')... The algos knew this could occur and therefore their certainty was only 91%, i was insulted they would doubt me even that much

I don't know what AI you were using but mine predicted you would catch the device with 106% certainty although it did get the means of defusion incorrect because it told me you would eat it with 58% certainty/43% uncertainty.