Acrary is a genius!
- Thread starter greaterreturn
- Start date
- Status
Again, you are talking about the unnecessary at this point details. If you're interested in this stuff, you could start by reading thread "System Development with acrary".
The discussion here is about approach to the markets, system building. What you want to know is very dependent on secondary details, like how many systems are used, what markets are traded and what the systems themselves are. But you could get very different results using the same approach.
I don't know what it is exactly what acrary uses and what he uses artificial immune response system for. Is it for performing classification or is it to tell what systems to use in the current market conditions. Another interesting topic is how do you represent price data in order to classify it in a structured way. I know this information may be worth millions of dollars and it won't be divulged here on public forum.
Jack's been playing this game on the internet for more than a decade. Don't get sucked into it.
Example: some people from Harvard came up empty handed after trying to decipher Jack's "teachings" for more than a year, starting in 1999. Look at how they felt after wasting all that time:
...I don't understand why it's not possible to verify such a successful futures trading system if it is based on objective rules. My own attempts to automate the system have been frustrated at every turn by an enormous problem that is apparently only resolvable by gut instinct... I have spent a great deal of time respectfully reading and thinking about what you have written, but mostly what I feel now is frustration.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc..._frm/thread/ccc785d53a418f8a/ad6210f80809669d
Example: some people from Harvard came up empty handed after trying to decipher Jack's "teachings" for more than a year, starting in 1999. Look at how they felt after wasting all that time:
...I don't understand why it's not possible to verify such a successful futures trading system if it is based on objective rules. My own attempts to automate the system have been frustrated at every turn by an enormous problem that is apparently only resolvable by gut instinct... I have spent a great deal of time respectfully reading and thinking about what you have written, but mostly what I feel now is frustration.
http://groups.google.com/group/misc..._frm/thread/ccc785d53a418f8a/ad6210f80809669d
Thanks for your response. I appreciate it.
I commented in the vein I did to move to where you are and I really do not have an interst in drawing you to where I am.
ET amply demonstrates that there are many many ways to trade and there is a spectrum of results. I certainly follow and classify a bunch of them by their characterisitcs in terms of the profits they generate and the rate at which those profits can be safely compounded.
I'll parse you comment and maybe what I suggested may become more meaningful. It is certainly not my way or the highway. I just find acrary's life expereinces and his progress to be quite instructive.
Sometimes people with the orientation of the Conventional Wisdom of the financial industry are skeptical of anything outside of that dopmain. I'm so glad to see that you are not sceptical and are not wedded to that CW.
D [/B][/QUOTE]
What belief system is it that you are so convinced that I have?
Mostly the CW of the financial industry and some college education in a traditional field. Very little on the ground experience with money and how building wealth occurs through partnering with the markets. Or less.
We've gone back and forth about the whole conventional wisdom thing. If I were entrenched in CW as you assert then I wouldn't be trying to be a trader. I would "know better" and realize it wasn't worth the effort. I believe some of my early harsh comments in my first thread left a strong impression. CW is all I knew to come in with, but I intend to leave here making money whether that's any consequence of ET or not.
as you say you have taken a money making fork in the road orientation. ET is largely oriented as you are. you are definitely in the majority and I am definitely in the minority as is acrary.
If you, acrary or anyone here shows me something worthy of consideration, I will take it seriously.
Take a lead from the examples of 4 out of 5 people. rejecting learning how to think critically and learning how to learn. and learning how to acquire a differentiated mind is not what people do on ET, ordinarily. I do not have anything that fits the "worthy tst" for MAKING MONEY. NAKING MONEY IS NOT WHAT LEARNING TO TRADE IS ABOUT.
I dig your orientation and the specific attitude that comes with it. doing the "work" to become knowledgable and skills is different than doing the work to "make money".
You demonstrate something that clearly works and is axiomatic and there is nothing left to fight.
There is nothing adversarial about knowledge and skills. In trading there is, in fact, no competition. Huge markets offer. A trader takes the offer if he wishes. OODA is the "fight" game. Go see john Boyd or Sttenbarger. They do the fight thing using induction.
Show me, show us all.
That happened and it was fun. some people didn't "get it. I have been trained to not care. I did care for quite a while.
For those who may think to remind me, I know that no one owes me anything. All I can do is ask. I am asking....
You spend a great deal of time telling others what they are doing incorrectly and perhaps more time stating what others could be doing correctly, but not in a way that allows them to correct their mistakes.
there is no way I can get tradere666 tro be rich like others who use the approach. If I tell him to use a correct Universe (would you like the current one posted daily?), it simply is not possible for him to use it like opther do who are successful.
I post the rules of trading stocks frequently (A one pager) I give a 77 page reference for its use. People who construct the universe are in daily contact and they always know the batting order for the week.
Getting upto 8 or 10 pages daily form jme requires opening an email printing the charts gluing the charts and debriefing the day's activities.
do you think getting 2,000,000 hits ayear is "not a way for people to get it?'. Of course they do not correct their mistakes.
You can see photos of Antarctica daily on ET. Get serious.
You may not intend to (I'll provide benefit of doubt) but your posts often reek of elitism. You either believe we can't learn(ridiculous), don't want us to learn (intended obfuscation, after all, some would say we are your competition. I know, not you though), or are just flexing your presumed intellect in poorly chosen prose for your own edification on this site.
I am a little different. trading is not a matter of intellect. It is a mater of having a mind that is differentiated with respect to the markets and personal skills. Acquiring such is done through "work" and work comes in the form of purposeful learning doing drills. Drills are simple repetitive activities that turn short term memory into organized long term memory. It is like learning to drive a car. You cannot read your way to driving a car.
If you choose to speak in code, you must expect others to question you, your intent, or your goods.
I do speak in the language of taking the market's offer. I speak to those who do work. I am swer questions of observers in the observer's language. PEP and its applications are foreign to the CW of the financial industry. the measures of the financial industry to what we do are ridiculous. They are off the scale and, therefore, unbelievable and astonishing. That is the way it is.
you arequestioning me; I am responding. you may just be sitting on your ass asking questions. Many people are debriefing using an 8 page guide today. I don't think you are one of them. you know why; I know why.
Once more, show me something I can act on 5 minutes from now, and I may just surprise you.
Have a coke and print this and reread it 10 times.
Please don't surprise me.
Mostly the CW of the financial industry and some college education in a traditional field. Very little on the ground experience with money and how building wealth occurs through partnering with the markets. Or less.
We've gone back and forth about the whole conventional wisdom thing. If I were entrenched in CW as you assert then I wouldn't be trying to be a trader. I would "know better" and realize it wasn't worth the effort. I believe some of my early harsh comments in my first thread left a strong impression. CW is all I knew to come in with, but I intend to leave here making money whether that's any consequence of ET or not.
as you say you have taken a money making fork in the road orientation. ET is largely oriented as you are. you are definitely in the majority and I am definitely in the minority as is acrary.
If you, acrary or anyone here shows me something worthy of consideration, I will take it seriously.
Take a lead from the examples of 4 out of 5 people. rejecting learning how to think critically and learning how to learn. and learning how to acquire a differentiated mind is not what people do on ET, ordinarily. I do not have anything that fits the "worthy tst" for MAKING MONEY. NAKING MONEY IS NOT WHAT LEARNING TO TRADE IS ABOUT.
I dig your orientation and the specific attitude that comes with it. doing the "work" to become knowledgable and skills is different than doing the work to "make money".
You demonstrate something that clearly works and is axiomatic and there is nothing left to fight.
There is nothing adversarial about knowledge and skills. In trading there is, in fact, no competition. Huge markets offer. A trader takes the offer if he wishes. OODA is the "fight" game. Go see john Boyd or Sttenbarger. They do the fight thing using induction.
Show me, show us all.
That happened and it was fun. some people didn't "get it. I have been trained to not care. I did care for quite a while.
For those who may think to remind me, I know that no one owes me anything. All I can do is ask. I am asking....
You spend a great deal of time telling others what they are doing incorrectly and perhaps more time stating what others could be doing correctly, but not in a way that allows them to correct their mistakes.
there is no way I can get tradere666 tro be rich like others who use the approach. If I tell him to use a correct Universe (would you like the current one posted daily?), it simply is not possible for him to use it like opther do who are successful.
I post the rules of trading stocks frequently (A one pager) I give a 77 page reference for its use. People who construct the universe are in daily contact and they always know the batting order for the week.
Getting upto 8 or 10 pages daily form jme requires opening an email printing the charts gluing the charts and debriefing the day's activities.
do you think getting 2,000,000 hits ayear is "not a way for people to get it?'. Of course they do not correct their mistakes.
You can see photos of Antarctica daily on ET. Get serious.
You may not intend to (I'll provide benefit of doubt) but your posts often reek of elitism. You either believe we can't learn(ridiculous), don't want us to learn (intended obfuscation, after all, some would say we are your competition. I know, not you though), or are just flexing your presumed intellect in poorly chosen prose for your own edification on this site.
I am a little different. trading is not a matter of intellect. It is a mater of having a mind that is differentiated with respect to the markets and personal skills. Acquiring such is done through "work" and work comes in the form of purposeful learning doing drills. Drills are simple repetitive activities that turn short term memory into organized long term memory. It is like learning to drive a car. You cannot read your way to driving a car.
If you choose to speak in code, you must expect others to question you, your intent, or your goods.
I do speak in the language of taking the market's offer. I speak to those who do work. I am swer questions of observers in the observer's language. PEP and its applications are foreign to the CW of the financial industry. the measures of the financial industry to what we do are ridiculous. They are off the scale and, therefore, unbelievable and astonishing. That is the way it is.
you arequestioning me; I am responding. you may just be sitting on your ass asking questions. Many people are debriefing using an 8 page guide today. I don't think you are one of them. you know why; I know why.
Once more, show me something I can act on 5 minutes from now, and I may just surprise you.
Have a coke and print this and reread it 10 times.
Please don't surprise me.
Attached is page 1 of 8 carry over for tomorrow. See if you can read it.
Sure but at some point in all of that process one has to stop and say if I do X the result is Y, if I do Z the results is Y * 1.5 or 0.5.
I don't have the time or interest in reading vast amounts of discussion until I see some concrete objective numbers somewhere (better than mine, hopefully) as there is so much of this on ET that leads to nothing but empty debate, often among folks with significant unresolved personality issues.
So if the systems involved used without the refinement under discussion = 9.897 and with it you have = 11.3 (by whatever metric) then there is an objective reason for my interest.
Poor old Jack believes he was hired by the UN and several countries to investigate claims of global warming at Antarctica as he told us in this thread:
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=161373&perpage=6&pagenumber=14
Quote from jack hershey:
You may not be a professional explorer hired by various nations or the united Nations. I was and there was a purpose. Long range planning primarily.
He must be the only professional adventurer that never leaves his computer
Don't forget to stop in the gift shop on your way out and buy the limited edition Jack Hershey paper trading doll to commemorate his stellar 24% loss in a trading contest in 2002 that he didn't have the integrity to finish.. limit one per customer
<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2428031>
- Status