Duref Mudgins Invites Jack Hershey to Reminisce

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote from lagnflag:

Juvenile.

Look who's talking.
As soon as anyone confronts you, you flame, send abusive PM's and chartacter assassinate ala: " .... you cant trade - paper trader...." etc etc

Biggest two faced hypocrite on ET ever !!!

It's a shame moderators don't continually remove your posts, you are ET's polluter Extraordinaire.
 
Where's that superior system Einstein?

Surely you have something superior to Jack's system?

Maybe the "SPM" system....what a complete piece of crap that was....Oh yeah, lets use lagging indicators...that should blow out your imaginary account pretty quick.....

Lets see your track record with that piece of shit approach....:D

Suddenly you're starting to look more and more like the village fucking idiot.....

:D
 
Dear Swordsman, I like you fine otherwise, but an hypocracy is a hypocritical democracy. The word you wanted was hypocrisy. But don't worry, inability to spell goes with being an SCT trader. The obvious cause is reading too many Jack posts. You may say anything you like on one of my threads, but kindly go to the trouble of spelling correctly.
 
You'd rather nitpick a spelling error than acknowledge that your good buddy, Lagnflag, keeps painting himself into a corner.

And Sigmund Freud, after a bunch of beers and a few lines of blow comes out like...Duref Mudgins. Go figure :)

Quote from Joe Doaks:

Dear Swordsman, I like you fine otherwise, but an hypocracy is a hypocritical democracy. The word you wanted was hypocrisy. But don't worry, inability to spell goes with being an SCT trader. The obvious cause is reading too many Jack posts. You may say anything you like on one of my threads, but kindly go to the trouble of spelling correctly.
 
I posted what I believe to be the bottom line for this bullshit about Jack Hershey

The people who are most critical of Jack are those who can't make it happen in this market...Their frustration is evident in every post....Like I said before, its like having to walk past an aggressive panhandler. He wants you to give him some spare change, because he is too goddam lazy to do a decent day's work....and he's pissed at those of us who found a way to make a buck....

I think we've let this crap go on long enough...

If someone wants to improve on the basis of any system let alone Jack's....If they have a decent criticsim of any method, then more power to them...I say give them some respect...but this repetitive, drive-by, whining crap is just too much...
 
A lot of my posts got deleted too, but who cares. Why do you need to whine all the time? If you don't like the way ET is run, you are free to leave at anytime :p

Quote from lagnflag:


And your censorship is just as pathetic callmate! You can't even live up to your own countries ideals of freedom. You should be shot along with Steve as a traitor.
 
Are you implying you are going to leave and start your own site? Because that would be wonderful.

PS: Hack Jershey2 = Lagnflag

You aren't fooling anyone.

Quote from lagnflag:

Yeah those founding fathers were real whiny bastards.
 
Wow you retards are still going at this?

And romanus you finally dropped your pseudo-intellectual rhetoric for something more appropriate? congratulations.
 
Quote from jack hershey:

Your comments point out that you are bound (have a boundary) that is just totally ego centric. This is dumb, stupid and ignorant.

What has happened over the years is that an algorithm has been offered. If and when anyone decided to use it and pass it forward it turned out that the algorithm spread to other areas. In time copying was invented, the PC came into being, APL's were set up so produce software languages, and programming became part of formal ducation. The algorithm blended these things into it's use and passing forward. So you see practitioners, the system of the algorithm in many forms (mostly human mind poer and electronic); this is described as five generations of peoplein three words: "because we are".

As a consequence of this, the algorithm and its use becoming practical to 1 out of 5 people who consider it (See silly to complex polls which get the approximately same result), my persona became associated with the algorithm and that is where the first two words come from: "I am".


Another word for consciousness is ego.

Ego is limited, born of the idea of limitation in the unlimited mind of "I am". Ego can be described as Reality's personal computer used to test the idea of Self-opposites. That is, for every attribute native to "I am", ego runs every possible iteration of it's opposite. Since "I am" is perfect, the ideas invested in the ego are pretty much garbage. However, the ego does answer the question "What am I?" definitively in negative terms. Whatever terms are explored, they will all be unreal. However, in it's quest for survival, the ego will make it's magic appear "real". Therefore, the "reality" of this world is all in support of the ego, it's "lifespan", and it's premises.

The ego is a thinking machine of questionable existence because, as I've said, it spawns out opposing attributes to what IS. It's power comes solely from belief, which itself is an opposite of knowledge. The machine spits out algorithms, coding an alt-universe in a single instant, not more significant than a green flash at sunset. As belief is given the machine's algorithms, it's thinking is executed in terms of form. Thus, all form is symbolic of ideas. This includes circumstances and events. The forms appear to have "life", but in fact, they are coded machines, regardless of plasticity. Man emerges among these forms, an automatron functioning in a virtual reality we call "the world", or, "the universe".

The ego does not allow for any other world or universe other than it's own. Limited, it knows nothing of knowledge or what I call the "Kingdom of God". The ego, and it's world will seem to exist until "I am" pulls the plug, disinvesting in it's "reality" by reversing the laws of perception which includes the concept of belief. The ego's "laws" are all opposite applications of the laws of God. It's thought system represents an operating system incompatible with reality. Man runs on this OS so long as he believes anything about the ego's world. Man "decides" between what he thinks is true or false. But the world is set up for man to choose between false and false. Instead of a true boolean system, it's just "bull" which produces, well, you get the point.

The ego posits the idea of "many", giving rise to the concept of "we", "they", "us", and "them". These are all unreal self-concepts which describe the oneness of "I am" in negative terms...that is, unholy terms. From this idea proceeds the concept of differences in appearance, talent, motive...producing the concept of competition. The concept of differences keys off of limitation, whereas, "I am" is/has everything. To have a difference between "I am" and "I am", you must take something away from everything to produce a difference. Hence, "man" is an extremely limited form of "I am", symbolizing a "sacrifice" of nearly everything he is/has, and rendering him unrecognizable to himself. This leads to fear and competition and war both hot and cold. Sports games and financial markets are manifestations of a cold war type mentality.

The concept of "man" is not profitable to "I am" except to illustrate "I am not this...I am not that...". In this way, everything in the world of forms/symbology is what I am not. From this more unlimited perspective, you can now evaluate what it is you are doing as you advocate the profitability of man, attempting to iteratively refine his existence. You are trying to improve what can never "work", and which does not exist. Man is truly not necessary to "I am", and does not add to his knowledge-base. So these are virtually meaningless endeavors except to satisfy curiosity about the unlimited nature of freedom.

Try to post from other than an egotistical point of view. It will be a challenge because all of your faith is invested in the ego's thought system. As a man, you are virtually unaware of any other thought system. Among men, you have differentiated -distinguished - yourself as a good learner of the ego's algorithms. And this has appeared to be profitable. By my calculations, you should be able to own the entire world in about six days. But this comes at the cost of a perpetual unawarness of what "I am" really is, and how you are connected to absolute wealth without the need to compete, toil, or earn.

You could pay this foreward instead, by informing the "many" of their wealth NOW. It is found in oneness. But instead you offer small gifts that cannot last. They cannot be shared with all, and one must lose for another to win. Not even the thought system/process which produces them will last because this is not the thought system of "I am", which is reality. Pay this forward, and you will be paid back because in the Kingdom of God, giving is recieving. What you sow you will reap. Give truth to get truth. Give confusion and you will get confusion. Give truth first, and you will pay it forward - forgive it - and the Kingdom will come back to you...back to your awareness of it. Only the Kingdom is sharable with all. Imagine sharing everything - total wealth - with everyone.

The Celtics parable is useful when interpreted to illustrate the invulnerability of oneness. This world symbolizes competition, as if the unreal could possibly compete with Reality. The idea of oneness will manifest invulnerability, and prove that Reality cannot be destroyed.

Learning is an invention of the ego, which has limited information, having virtually no knowledge. "I am" in the process of converting everything the ego invented to be used for the purpose of returning to the realm of true knowledge. Good learners are called for. What about you?


Jesus
 
Quote from jack hershey:

I am glad to say that the shift going on to the PE algorithm is greater thanany time in about 50 years. Of course, you are regognizing the potentialaudience and how important it is to advance the transfer without hitches or me beinga bottleneck. I am being debottlenecked as we speak through process learning going on; it is taking me out of the picture by just overunning the limitations. I am sure as more and more tranfer occurs the track records of these many many people will be discovered as the passforward occurs all over the world.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



If it's based on process learning couldn't software be designed to train the user by running specific drills over and over? I don't know much about process learning, but I'm sure there's a way to accomplish it quickly by doing the processes at a high frequency.

Thanks,

TNG

You have stated in a nutshell what any learner may wish to do.

As you can see there is script all over the place for many platforms for all of the pieces.

One fairly interesting piece is the sweeps chart in nine colors. Use a four colored pen on the chart do do MADA cycles over and over for the 81 bars on the ES chart. We have four colored pens manufactured here and we keep slipping them out to whomever wants them.

Last week, Wednesday, we helped get a luncheon together (the third in the series.) The pens were used for filling forms and checks. About 27,000 dollars was put to work in about two hours by the use of pens on paper. The three points on the graph are 15,000, 17,500 and 27,000 dollars. Looks sort of like mold growing in a petri dish. Today is LTC at a residence for the elderly.

The computer has an upside and a downside relative to making money. It definitely is the source of all that is needed to do drills. Printing is one of the most important things it does. Filling in the 3 ring binder daily with the results of the daily drills (those that take care of doing the trading parts of MADA.) will eat up about 20 pages of paper a day.

Automating some drills too soon is a downside. I started out by doing my charts in pencil on a graph I designed (you will notice very few places sell paper designed for doing graphs manually. One really grat trader who still does it will be at the Trader's Expo again. He explains how it gives him a feel on the commodities he trades.

If a person does five years of 20 to 30 stock graphs a day by hand, he certainly can summer in Europe and drive any MB or BMW he desires.

As far as doing the MADA on stocks and SCT manually, it is the fastest way to expert (50 contracts doing 20 to 40 trades a day and taking the ES market offer totally).

In 6 1/2 hours a person goes through (from top to the continue point or the bottom where the change causes the Action trade) the sweeps chart several times a bar. He see the operating point migrate as he fills in the four pages (average) on his log.

This becomes the embodiment of "knowing that you know" at all times. Everything is binary so there are no IF's. Moving into the world of certainty is more swift if a person has no garbage. And it is true as we see here it is impossible for the mind to do it after a certain point of consequences of past decisions has built the mind into the CW algorithm.

I am doing the CD's pocket thing in the culling down of my writings. Tooling will be the emphasis. It will not be comparable to anything out there are as a reference for any presently proffered trading strategies. I have about a dozen fixes for the leading CW strategies as well; they are examples in a referential way for practitioners of the algorithm who came into the scene via these routes.

As has been seen the one page chart of PVT is just replicated 20 to 40 times a day on SCT using the sweeps chart for MADA.

Drilling MADA is done daily.

The P, V relation is unconscious and automatically available at every moment.

the binary vectors of MADE and Sentiment appear in every MADA cycle.

You have three finite sets that are composed of subsets each having sufficient binary elements to provide certainty and have no probabilities since binary math precludes this. By orienting to the null hypothesis to have the finite sets there is no Black Swan in the picture. There are finite sets for M, A and D of MADA. D has five elements and the two most used are HOLD and REVERSE.

Each lap of MADA ends and provide closure with certainty. Emotion s only related to M and the three emotions that interlock are support, comfort and confidence. If any fear or anxiety or anger appears it is a warning that the MADA is not being followed.

The algorithm shows that any excellent exit is synonomous with an entry; thus only reversals are used.

One drill that is apparently tough to do is the breaking of the entry-exit modus of those who are just assessing the algorithm. Often they use parts of the algorithm to refine their present mode of trading. But they stick with entering and exiting. Between these turns they are sidelined.

Emotionally they are not doing MADA but are doing an unconscious rendition of OODA where risk begins with D and lasts until the next D. Too bad. Risk engenders the emotions of fear, anxiety and anger according to testing paid for by the financial industry. D in OODA is the hypothesis of an inductive process. It is the CW definition of insanity. the ultimate betting scenario of how and why the financial industry cannot out perform the indexes and never will.

Fortunately, this makes this algorithm unbelievable and astonishing to those using or affected by the CW algorithm.

Do you find it amazing that people argue with the easiest to test and understand parts of your trading system? As you say "what is being offered" simply cannot be disputed, yet so many people take issue with that first and foremost. All good exits equal good entries and vice versa. These are things that should be well understood so we can move on, but it doesn't look like you'll ever get that luxury here.

Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions. If a person wanted to learn SCT, would you say the journals here are the fastest way to accomplish that, or is there another medium/place that has a better structure for this?

Thanks,

TNG
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top