Elon Musk & Neuralink

[ShaunWhite]

And just one extra John.... All this death of manual trading stuff assumes that all these fancy Dan systems actually agree with each other, and they never do That means the very essence of a market still persists, ie difference of opinion, and the resulting tug-of-war goes on.

[Atho55]

Having a tranche of data provided by BF daily via the Promo files also gives you the opportunity to set up a prediction model to look for general trends rather than inplay trends if you so wish. I have 3 on test at the moment.

A simple analogy, you get up every morning, look at the Barometer in the hall and take the reading. Before you go to bed you write down what the weather has been like for that day. You have many years worth of readings.

You decide to go out tomorrow, you look at the reading you took today, hmmm 32.5. You find every instance of 32.5 in your data along with what the weather was the next day. Hmmm, 80% of the occasions it was sunny on the next day. You then remember you are self isolating.. damm.. got to stop in again.



It`s not about being right every time, but being right more times than being wrong.

[ShaunWhite]

The weather analogy has a compelling counter argument.

A key feature of the markets Walsh and his partners invest in is that they are characterised by randomly “independent events". Specifically, the occurrence of one event does not influence the chance of the other and they therefore have “finite variance", or limited downside risk.

“Gambling has the huge benefit of having independent events – I cannot get blown up by the black swans that plague financial markets."

He says deploying mathematics in “equities markets that may have infinite variance outcomes makes working out probabilities much harder. You don’t know whether you are summing a sequence of fractions that add to one or if they add to infinity, because financial markets have non-independent [or potentially related] events," he says.

The bankable independence of results in gambling markets is the “component of our strategy that gives me the most security", Walsh says

Not my words but those of a guy who's got enough spare change from gambling to spend aud200m on a gallery because as a gambler he feels he's added nothing to society.

It all comes down to whether you think/know events are related. The weather tomorrow is related to the weather today, but is that true of a horse race tomorrow and one today?

You open up some good topics of debate Athos. Your view of events being related is a very popular one, but you have to admit it's far from a cut and dried.

[ruthlessimon]

You decide to go out tomorrow, you look at the reading you took today, hmmm 32.5. You find every instance of 32.5 in your data along with what the weather was the next day. Hmmm, 80% of the occasions it was sunny on the next day.

We've gotta be careful with that kinda rigidity thou

Ideally I wanna be seeing things like this:

32.6. 79% of the occasions it was sunny on the next day.
32.5. 80% of the occasions it was sunny on the next day.
32.4. 79% of the occasions it was sunny on the next day.
32.3. 78% of the occasions it was sunny on the next day.

[Atho55]

It is the very fact that there are people / teams / organisations who are cleverer, have better kit, are more dedicated all competing in the same arena make it more difficult to succeed. It also makes it more challenging. Hence the reason for looking at alternative ideas that are not necessarily mainstream.

By nature I do not have a compulsion to wager so can chase down any idea to the Nth degree till satisfied I understand it so potentially actually finding something is a bit of a novelty albeit early days yet. Although it has a modicum of science behind it it could just be a lucky streak and trying to figure out how to test for that is the latest hurdle.

[Big Bad Barney]

Although it has a modicum of science behind it it could just be a lucky streak and trying to figure out how to test for that is the latest hurdle.

Presumably, Mr Musk's hive mind will already know the answer. Get yourself the brain implant, yoink...there ya go...

[Big Bad Barney]

There's even an argument that says greater efficiency makes trading easier.

How does that argument go? My first thought is that it only makes trading easier for those who are the fastest?

I'm not denying trading is a competitive sport, but if tech and knowledge were the only factors then the markets would already be dead to manual traders, and they aren't.

What are the other factors?
Tech, Knowledge and Randomness?

And just one extra John.... All this death of manual trading stuff assumes that all these fancy Dan systems actually agree with each other, and they never do That means the very essence of a market still persists, ie difference of opinion, and the resulting tug-of-war goes on.

Well. I don't know. Say we got 10 Peter Webb clones in the room. They're the only people in the market. What happens then?

---

I presume a superbrain with unlimited thinking power would be able to make the optimium judgement. The optimum stake, etc... it's not gonna be right all the time and there'll be tug of war, etc....but if you got 20 Fancy Dan's in a market and 1 not so fancy Dan. Which fancy dan is going to lose his money over time?

On a scale of now until the end of time. If humanity hasn't imploded (my wager)....at some point on the scale there's gonna be a lot of fancy dans around...(compare now with say...15 years ago)... the more of them, the harder it'll be (for non fancy dan)...

---

Another consideration is this; Two beings sit in a room. A perfect AI machine (All the historically profitable traders rolled into one). A guy sitting on a computer pressing buttons, but using his own wit. Whats the difference?

I would say, The perfect AI machine doesn't have access to immediate observation of reality and the guy using his wits doesn't have access to all kinds of precalculated predictions, models, available in an instant...etc.....

I'm not sure if this means you could argue its the other way round? (manual traders have the edge)...until a hive mind exists that is...

I don't really believe a hive mind is going to come along... but ya know...its fun to think about... all this is fairly novel to me at the moment cause I haven't thought about it before....so sorry if I am being dull...

[Smog_Trader]

Morning all,
I'm not new here but like to read, absorb and learn. This topic is very interesting to me, there's a good documentary called AlphaGo which goes down the AI route rather than the Elon Neuralink way of integrating the brain with computing power.
For me, AI will have the biggest impact on trading markets, especially in the medium term, as they can learn for themselves the potential upsides and pitfalls, all very quickly and the person coding the AI doesn't have to know anything about trading.
The full film is here for anyone with an hour and a half to spare:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXuK6gekU1Y

If AI gets the chance to learn the markets before Nerualink becomes a reality, AI may already have won the day.

[jamesg46]

Morning all,
I'm not new here but like to read, absorb and learn. This topic is very interesting to me, there's a good documentary called AlphaGo which goes down the AI route rather than the Elon Neuralink way of integrating the brain with computing power.
For me, AI will have the biggest impact on trading markets, especially in the medium term, as they can learn for themselves the potential upsides and pitfalls, all very quickly and the person coding the AI doesn't have to know anything about trading.
The full film is here for anyone with an hour and a half to spare:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXuK6gekU1Y

If AI gets the chance to learn the markets before Nerualink becomes a reality, AI may already have won the day.

Thanks, I'll give this a watch later!

Personally I feel that Neuralink beats AI handsdown, AI doesn't have a conciousness, a human with the power of AI direct to the brain is next level.

[jamesg46]

Morning all,
I'm not new here but like to read, absorb and learn. This topic is very interesting to me, there's a good documentary called AlphaGo which goes down the AI route rather than the Elon Neuralink way of integrating the brain with computing power.
For me, AI will have the biggest impact on trading markets, especially in the medium term, as they can learn for themselves the potential upsides and pitfalls, all very quickly and the person coding the AI doesn't have to know anything about trading.
The full film is here for anyone with an hour and a half to spare:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WXuK6gekU1Y

If AI gets the chance to learn the markets before Nerualink becomes a reality, AI may already have won the day.

Enjoyed watching that, thabk you for the share. I may have found a new pass time

[Smog_Trader]

[/quote]

Thanks, I'll give this a watch later!

Personally I feel that Neuralink beats AI handsdown, AI doesn't have a conciousness, a human with the power of AI direct to the brain is next level.
[/quote]

That opens a rabbit hole of a conversation, lots of topics can stem from that! Would a human with AI linked to the brain be the dominant intelligence in that symbiosis? Or would the AI determine (probably rightly so) that the human brain is flawed and irrational, so take over dominance anyway?

Not having a consciousness could well be the key to successful trading, just plugging away without emotion, distraction, each trade truly independent of all others to the point of surpassing the most successful human traders...

[Smog_Trader]

[/quote]

Enjoyed watching that, thabk you for the share. I may have found a new pass time
[/quote]

Glad you did, I like things like that, gives some food for thought. I've already got a plan of what I'd like to do. Now I just need a quantum computer, ability to construct an AI with the data structure behind it and some other technology that does exist, the data is too slow to receive, interpret and act on at the moment. The cost is hugely prohibitive too.

Anyway, there's my pie in the sky idea!

[Big Bad Barney]

That AlphaGo team had like 8-10 people on it? Working for 5 years did they say? I don't know how to play go, but I'd guess its got much simpler rules than trading does?

[ruthlessimon]

There's even an argument that says greater efficiency makes trading easier.

How does that argument go? My first thought is that it only makes trading easier for those who are the fastest?

I'm thinking something like overround on preoff.

A constantly tight spread/no gaps, is clearly a sign of efficiency, but it's an absolute necessity for someone to be a profitable taker.

[ShaunWhite]

There's even an argument that says greater efficiency makes trading easier.

How does that argument go? My first thought is that it only makes trading easier for those who are the fastest?

I'm thinking something like overround on preoff.

A constantly tight spread/no gaps, is clearly a sign of efficiency, but it's an absolute necessity for someone to be a profitable taker.

Yep, and more generally if prices didn't move to where they should be when something happens then you wouldn't stand much chance of predicting it. Risk/reward calcs would be impossible without well behaved tight markets.