Would you collaborate with a programmer if it meant sharing your system/research?

alistera said:
I was asked to look at some ChatGPT code recently, it was useless as it didn't solve the underlying problem, the trading idea was fundamentally flawed so actually makes it worse for people, they truly believe they have something that works.


ChatGPT is the new Simon Cowell :D
More...

Yeah you say that I bet you're listening to the best of Five as we speak
GPT cannot polish a turd, true, but not every GPT user is a turd polisher.
 
Laissez Faire said:
Well, that was my main concern expressed on the first page of this thread, so don't think I'm completely naive or blue eyed. As it's not a mechanical system/algorithm and requires some know-how and savvy to use, I decided to take the risk.

Even after a year, it's apparent to me that the programmer does not fully understand what he have (or had) in his hands.

If it was a fully automated system which would be extremely profitable without any user input I would of course never taken the chance.
More...
Hello Laissez Faire,

You gotta program yourself buddy. Or you already know man, gotta manually trade guessing
 
Last edited:
Sprout said:
Yes, a tool is as good as the craftsman yielding it. Sounds like he was a beginner or junior programmer with not that much experience.

Another thing to consider is feeding your code into a chatGPT assisted IDE. Many are finding it's ability to refactor, comment and streamline existing code to be an underappreciated functionality.

It's all depends on how you structure the problem to be solved.
More...

I imagined the guy should be able enough. Have been working full time for nearly a decade and I did my best to qualify him initially. I also ran a cross-check of his proposed architecture/solution with another programmer and he said he seemed to know what he was talking about.

And maybe he does know how to talk, but like we all should know by now, talk is cheap. :) And visions or ideas are worthless if not implemented or completed.

Regardless of the reasons he didn't manage to complete it. Like most critics in this thread who knows nothing of what I have I'm sure he vastly underestimated the task at hand. Actually, he admitted that.

Thanks for the suggestion.
 
Super computers can process 1/240000th of the contextual mind, quantum computers can process 1/60th, ChatGPT is somewhere between the two, doesn't really say much for the cognitive capacity people have today which is why ChatGPT is all the rage, it's doing something they should be able to but can't :D

"I also ran a cross-check of his proposed architecture/solution with another programmer and he said he seemed to know what he was talking about." - let me guess, you didn't pay him for it.
 
Sprout said:
Yes, a tool is as good as the craftsman yielding it.
More...

My point was that it might not be the right tool to begin with, but if you're a programmer, that's what you may be inclined to use, i.e., "I'm going to solve the markets with programming and machine learning and super duper advanced algorithms."

Part of the system/framework I have is an extensive dataset which lets me ask questions and find answers to them. The programmer didn't even understand the questions to ask, but wanted to throw machine learning at the data set in order to "learn". That really tells me all I need to know about his potential progress.

First, the right questions. Then answer them. Programming may or may not be the right tool for that job. IMHO, as always. :)
 
Laissez Faire said:
Part of the system/framework I have is an extensive dataset which lets me ask questions and find answers to them. The programmer didn't even understand the questions to ask, but wanted to throw machine learning at the data set in order to "learn". That really tells me all I need to know about his potential progress.

:)
More...
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:DLMFAO HAHAHHAHAHA that is funnnyyyyyyy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top