bushwaffle wrote:taggard wrote:bushwaffle wrote:taggard wrote:re humans amplified by machines are very hard to model using abstractions over periods of time.
good luck
Terminator/Skynet
terminator
have you seen "REVOLVER" along with "FRESH" two of the better "trader education films". the point in revolver is that the issues are more within us--the perspective on the event (as far as traders esp) is more to the point. two guys can see the same chart--trade it inversely and both win. we b liking "relative absolutes"--not because there are no absolute absolutes but because we ourselves fluctuate mentally.
amusing experiment--get a small clock with a second hand and sit down at a table placing the clock on the table. next noting the second hand breath in for 5 seconds--contain the breath for 5 seconds--breath out for 5 seconds--contain the breath for 5 seconds. or adjust the time to whatever is comfortable to you. the key is to consider 1 cycle these 4 movements.
next simply make 30 of these moves counting mentally as you and watch what happens. this is a simple demonstration of the fluctuation of the mind. next put me in front of 3 screens with moving data (even if it is only qqq in 3 time frames) and naturally i am trading money which i like--and consider the fluctuation issue.
fresh is superior in my opinion as the trader starts with a 0 position and winds up winning "everything". revolver is an attempt to look at ego in a street wise situation--the play is simple enough--do egg-xactly what you don't want to do to win. wait who are you anywhey?
Which FRESH are you referring to? /link I couldn't get high enough to follow REVOLVER, but the George Costanza approach sounds like egg-xactly what I need to trade by if past results are an indicator. The clock experiment is going to mess with me, because...much like my trading...I would rather contemplate the outcome than to execute it and I'm sure I'll find a way to lose money doing it whether I have the outcome predicted or not.
(1) the point with revolver was ego something you just referred to as "i would rather contemplate the outcome". the problem is "who is I". when observed very closely we are constructs" hence "i'm sure i'll find a way to lose the money" if this is a constant situation is ideal since it only needs to be inverted to make money. in the movie jake is trying to act as he usually does--to get even--and the point is to invert that thinking and walk away. what keeps us from doing this is the ego which feels at risk. eventually he discovers that he is "being conned by logic" and rises above this. the key is to do exactly what you don't want to and can see no reason to--because it is that which is holding one back
(2) the fresh movie is directed boaz yakin in 1994 and is very linear in story telling and the points alluded to. the key idea is when encountering a larger enemy to use events and situations to your advantage. in the film a kid defeats all the adults (most of whom are scum trying to exploit or use him).
(3) not that it is any of my business--but i would consider keeping records of your actions if you have loss issues (or maybe you are just kidding) and watch the patterns. very quickly you will note something similar running though them.
(4) a simple rule set--for example. my problem is over-thinking. i can react quickly--but after years of trading different time frames--it's easy for me to have "conceptual time frame leak". if i trade a 5 min i can actually win using a rule set that works something like this.
the secon i know there is a range chill do nothing (almost blindly)
the second i know there is a trend enter (almost blindly)
the second i know that trade is wrong exit (almost blindly)
if the sucker is correct let it run about 1.5 to 2x longer than i "think i should"
maintain a sense of quiet relaxed good humor.
we could add to this--but the fact is most of the time we are looking at our ideas of what is rather than what is. the problem is (1) even noting it's going on. (2) spotting the problems (which our ego habits etc do everything to defend against as did jake's) (3) taking the inverse action. personally i think 90% of the issue is record keeping as this eventually forces us to admit where our flaws are at least.
my point above is that the rules are easy--the problem is admitting the market knows more than us and we are in effect "out of control"--that is attempting to be led by the market. this actually is "in control" since it is voluntary. amusingly refusing to do this gives the illusion of being in control but is actually being out of control (unless you believe that believing illusions is "in control").
so the clock thing proves that we are fluctuating constantly. the rule set is usually fairly simple at least in short term stuff. hence the term revolver as these two ideas more or less put a gun to our head to change.
good luck with your trading