Predicting randomness
- Thread starter oddiduro
- Start date
Quote from nononsense:
Simply put: When is a signal (most) random?
When its autocorrelation function is the dirac function or, which comes to the same, when it has a constant spectral density function. This is called 'white noise'.
Now, if the above doesn't hold, a signal can be 'colored noise' and still be random.
Generally, in order to define a random signal you can show how it is build up or transformed from a relation involving a classical well defined probabilistic process like the increments of the Wiener process, Poisson process, etc.
In a more general way, a random process can be defined as a solution to a stochastic differential equation.
What is random in this thread? The definition of random.
BINGO
Since there exist, and I never considered this, different definitions of random, which definition of random would fit the market?
Taleb speaks about considering the outcomes that DID NOT happen, as well as the one that did.
If we consider a number of the possible outcomes of "random", would that make the market less random?
Your opinion?
Only nitro knows for sure.
PS:
nononsense doesn't break his poor head too much about this. He is satisfied by simply squeezing enough cash out of it.
must have been a lill' random period.
PS:
if it wouldn't work: ask Jack.
Quote from vital-statistix:
Mumble, jumble, front run them, suck them in and take their money. Well done Jack!
Trading and investing, for me, and not like you, is not a matter of taking other people's money as an intention nor as a strategy.
The size of markets precludes anyone from sucking in anyone else. By being fairly low on the totem pole as an amateur this is moreso the situation. Anyone thinking that there is a possibility of sucking others in, is wasting his time, in my opinion.
With regard to common strategies such as the particular one of them that you mention, it is most likely that the majority of people just fall into one classification or another not by intention but rather by the scope and bounds of the character of what they do based upon their strategy, purpose and or effect.
Why front runners are put at the top of such comparitive lists is not important either except to say that their character and descriptions are most easily stated and usable as a point of departure to describe the others.
How you know that I am a front runner is not something to discuss, really. Who cares since I do not affect anyone else's trading by my trading either before or after, along side or opposite them.
Here within the theme of the discussion none of the major trading approaches is on the table since the discussion is on aspects of the market that are mostly not related to making money but more how people have perceptions of how to measure how the market works.
I posted a comment or two when others did not appreciate a market model and, specifically, a person drew the wrong conclusions while applying a trivial mathematical assessment of what was at hand.
Parking on a siding is common for people. On the other hand there is a lot to be said for staying on the mainline and getting to a major destination.
I am just a scene in your passing parade; what you ordinarily see has gone through a transition as well apparently. The breaking of your original illusion has been a tough experience (maybe terrifying and shocking, even).
People go from excitement and elation after first considerations of the markets. Lots of elevated dopamine with all the initial excitement.
So frustration , fear, conflict and opposition then suplant the former and levels of dopamine fall accordingly and the levels of adrenaline and cortisol are on the rise.
Now, in fact, you see the markets and me, in particular, acting in the state of coercion that you describe.
We all can say to each other "I am not you and you are not me." There is no substitute, on the other hand, for seeing how much of what others say makes sense to them.
There are differing truths for different folks. Life expereince creates this non erasable condition that makes us different from each other.
Others, it turns out, are what all of us have with whom to deal. It can be done along a path you do not choose presently.
There is nothing wrong with getting to the place of understanding others based upon their life experience. You could empathize even. It might lead to a conection even. What could come of that is actual communication.
The above mumble jumble is my way of expressing to you that we are vey different and yes it is true that I am a very aggressive front runner with the power of capital. I choose an alliance with the market, keenly based upon how it portends and I make use of this alliance to extract money from the market that others are not extracting.
There is a lot of value to you in knowing what and how I do it. I am connecting and communicating with you to share my experience, knowledge and skills. I am very pro dopamine and anti adrenaline and cortisol in relationships.
That's I believe Jack's secret in attracting the weak and credulous in search of market handy tricks. They never really see the light at the end of the tunnel, but as "his writing is difficult to digest", they keep on believing convinced that they somehow missed to grasp the deeper truths. How else can you explain a sef-perpetuating monster-thread like: "Question for Grob/Hershey..." ? Absolute incoherence and rascality, never the slightest touch with reality.
I don't still know whether this is cynical calculation or otherwise some kind of messianic utopia perhaps not unrelated to NLP advocacy.
"I am very pro dopamine and anti adrenaline and cortisol in relationships." (Jack)
"Always check yourself to see if you are doing the dopamine thing rather that the adrenaline or cortisol thing." (Jack)
Sounds like he is saying something intelligent but it really amounts to pure nonsense.