Search results

+1 Not news to you and me and probably not even news to the typical reichtard that trolls this forum, but it doesn't hurt to rub their noses in it at every opportunity. :D

Hey, I'll go on record as saying they shouldn't have played that musical selection. Guests on a show should be shown some decency regardless of what their politics are. If they're that offensive, don't have them on the show, simple as that. As far as the boorish behavior shown to the First...

You're right. See how easy it is to make these math dilettantes look as foolish as they truly are? :D

That's just your uninformed opinion. I see plenty of activity and substance. LIAR! What he stated was that some weird version of gambler's ruin was true, not that statement 1 was true. So what? My post had nothing to do with statement 2. Having trouble keeping up, I see. Kelly proves that...

Check this out :cool: http://www.nuclearphynance.com/Show%20Post.aspx?PostIDKey=156954 Intradaybill went forum shopping for validation and was told in no unclear terms that his ridiculous assertion of certain ruin for any trading system without limits regardless of performance is JUST...

Gingrich has such an off-putting personality that even people who agree with many of his politics don't want anything to do with him, and the good news is that he'll never figure that out. :p

+1

Not. You, on the other hand ... Lunatics do it all the time. You evidently have had a very sheltered life to not know this. Atheists by definition don't believe in God. So your bizarro "definition" of atheist (someone who calls himself God) is just proof of your own fricken stupidity. OWN...

You're welcome. The problem is that some people can't admit when they're wrong. I have a history with ronblack, who probably wouldn't have said a word if almost anybody else but me had posted what I posted. All I did was post a very common empirical formula for calculating a trader's edge...

Speak for yourself. Expected value = mean = arithmetic average. And what makes you ASSume that trade results are random variables? Just because you can't model them, that doesn't automatically make them random. Go back to remedial math; you're just embarrassing yourself at this point...

You're talking out of your ass. What makes you ASSume that there's a stable population being modeled here? I don't follow the common nonsense of treating a nonstationary time series as a probability distribution, I just use the information at hand to collect useful metrics. What you amusingly...

I agree with your PS. Let's try a different approach. Edge = E[x]/sqrt[E[x²]] System1: E[x]/sqrt[E[x²]] = +10/sqrt[34620] = 0.05374 System2: E[x]/sqrt[E[x²]] = +10/sqrt[330] = 0.55048 System2 is clearly superior to system1.

Clueless righties having a circle jerk here. :D Real liberals don't think much of Matthews. His politics are purely situational. He was totally in the sack for Bush in 2004. Liberals had Bush pegged in 2000 and anybody who wasn't repulsed by him by 2004 was either hopelessly clueless or a...

+1 You nailed it. :)

Ridiculously wrong. Because you know us all so well. *rolleyes* Wrong again. You're on a roll. :D I am, and even I wouldn't presume to know what every other atheist cares about. Only a theist bigot could be that arrogant and dead wrong.

LOL! WTF makes YOU think you know what an atheist would care? You're arrogant and presumptious.

He calls himself Jesus Christ, not God. Is anyone really surprised that religion (aka mass psychosis) would drive a lot of believers literally nuts?

I think the key difference is that a population of individuals is sampled simultaneously while a time series can only be sampled sequentially. True, the patients are all different from each but with large enough samples in both the treated group and the control group, it's reasonable to assume...

My point is that price is constantly changing, so how can you assume the only significant difference between t1 and t2 is the presence or absence of some event? Are p1 and p2 different? Apparently so, or you would have said otherwise. Did the price arrive at p1 and p2 from the same velocity...

It is impossible to step in the same river twice, for the river is constantly changing.