Financial topics

[aeden]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10- ... ost-lehman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gmmi2SvMMk

[aeden]

https://norse-mythology.org/wp-content/ ... y-Tree.jpg
http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php ... 680#p42429
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XCjaOua27w

Unless the eye is dull peace can proceed.

One obvious counter to the above is now that it has been publicized, the trade will no longer work. Whether or not that means that single stock volatility will also collapse now that everyone rushes to hedge it (while pushing index vol higher as hedges are pulled) remains to be seen.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10- ... ial-crisis

Mischief shall come upon mischief, and rumour shall be upon rumour;
then shall they seek a vision of the prophet; but the law shall perish from the priest,
and counsel from the ancients. Ezekiel

[Higgenbotham]

Here's the 3 weeks since this was posted May 15.



Quite a bit of similarity between the two time periods.

The 3 days after June 5. These will be my last day trades from the long side probably ever.

6/9 and 7/29 were on the weekend so there's no overlap in the results. The analyzer takes a maximum of 500 trades. That's why I had to break it up into 2 separate blocks.

[Higgenbotham]

The question is not whether you can beat an average bot. It's whether
you can beat the best bots, the ones implementing advanced AI
techology. Are you able to beat Tudor's "Paul-In-A-Box," the one you
referenced on June 7? I would suspect not.

I'm definitely beating it. A few days ago it was down on the year while I kept racking up consistent gains through the volatility.

[John]

> The question is not whether you can beat an average bot. It's
> whether you can beat the best bots, the ones implementing advanced
> AI techology. Are you able to beat Tudor's "Paul-In-A-Box," the
> one you referenced on June 7? I would suspect not.

> I'm definitely beating it. A few days ago it was down on the year
> while I kept racking up consistent gains through the
> volatility.

I have to say that I'm really surprised. I would think that an
advanced machine learning neural network algorithm could assimilate
the results of trillions of transactions and become unbeatable, at
least by humans. I guess AI hasn't yet advanced as far as I believed.

Anyway, congratulations!! Have you considered
"Higgenbotham-in-a-box"?

[Higgenbotham]

I think the consistency of my results over hundreds of trades would definitely be salable. The consistency of the gain loss ratio being in the high 50s over hundreds of transactions surprised me. It certainly doesn't feel that consistent while I'm doing it. It feels more like a roller coaster than a high speed train. But I have no interest in getting involved with other people and their money. And, as you know, I'm not a believer in the long term future of the stock market as it presently exists.

[aeden]

Same feeling H
Democrats do not exist.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11- ... over-sting

[Higgenbotham]

Today's result. $405. It took just a few minutes. You can see the market is down. But for what I'm doing, up or down doesn't really matter. You just read it as you go and work very short term. If it looks like it's starting to trend against me, I get out. That's the approximately 20% losers. The losers are larger than the winners, contrary to all conventional trading wisdom. Conventional wisdom doesn't generally work in my experience.

[aeden]

The point was his attitude and conditions of the book we open. The broker who was working for us in this instance and us would of carried our own contract forward but he had another idea which as you can see was a poor choice. We got our capital back and warrants. The Feds had another idea on how they wanted to handle it. We did have a recourse but would not submit our position. In the end the Judge agreed with our specific view of the contract. Would I construct another OTC contract as a CDO or similar? Since, did they redefine equity, doubtful, but we already had that discussion on terms of House and Equity.

The basis of the ruling is this.

Earlier surety for the enforcement was free man becoming no man, of "whatever estate or condition he may be" and introduced the phrase "due process of law" for "lawful judgement of his peers or the law of the land" So what rights do investors have since they are which class in true contextual reality.
So called unique allures and variety of strategies. Caveat emptor was first laid down as a principle in United States law in 1817, in a decision written by Chief Justice John Marshall for Laidlaw v. Organ.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11- ... r-policies

They go back since no man and due process has already been the Law of the Land.
The discussion was Surety.
The discussion is the annihilation of the Letter to the Constitutional Republic.

When the Office will not fulfill duty is not an Office. The older children understand this.

The broker of the movement is a criminal enterprise. The House discussion we had here was "no man status" since it had no
no way to deny House and Equity to dilute Surety.

As it was said you have no Army so you have no Law to enforce from the a bench.
Cavanaugh was the tip of the spear to destroy the Republic.
Even Obama and Reid said as much on the commitment of Border to Law.

[Higgenbotham]

I did a little more, bringing my total gain to $508 for the day. That may be all for today.