Quote from: tadamichi on Today at 12:37:04 AM

Quote from: death_wish on June 13, 2022, 08:56:42 PM

I don’t disagree with you about that, either. You do understand that when I just went through five months of hell and destroyed my own assets with foolishness that I had previously warned others against, I am urgently, passionately warning those who don’t know better—which I did, which makes it worse for me. Sad

Even after my recent experiences, I may try margin again someday. For example, if I were to devote serious time and effort to studying mathematical finance (I’ve been dabbling with it lately, on a “beginner dipping a toe in” level), become a Real Quant(TM), and create a thoroughly backtested algorithmic HFT bot based on a rigoroous probability model, then—well, then, at that point I would know if and how that bot should use leverage!

Until then, I will stay the hell away from margin. And I don’t need it. I can write other bots, that do more basic stuff without risks... I’m working on that; it was my plan to save my bitcoins from debt that I otherwise had no way to repay.

I will advise others accordingly.

It’s an interesting thought and something worth looking into.
But what i think speaks against bots ever reaching a level to survive such volatile markets consistently, even if based on the best mathematical finance, are two factors:

1. The market is basically infinitely complex, there will never be a point where every possible influencing factor can be modelled into a bot correctly, it’s a catching up game that never ends.

2. Markets are ruled by irrationally, a bot would need to understand emotion, deception, manipulation, politics and other factors.

Although nothing is impossible, i think it’s more efficient to just stick to fundamentals and keep it simple. The market is too much human influenced to be predicted by mathematics. Simple dca and spending time to accumulate more fiat trough businesses or well paying jobs will probably beat trying to time the market, in most cases.

I want to make it very clear, I am not encouraging any kind of TA or day-trading strategies!

TA is astrology. (And doubt that anyone could accuse me of low IQ—not that I care. Cheers to ImThour for his savvy buy, but his forum account personal text is nonsense.)

And (as an issue distinct from but overlapping with TA), amateur day-trading is gambling, maybe getting lucky for awhile, and then getting rekt.

I do not want my posts to mislead anyone.

I am not worried about newbies getting burned experimenting with what I meant by “Real Quant(TM)” stuff—because they can’t. For instance, here is a screenshot from a tiny part of one page of one academic research paper in the vast field of mathematical finance—I found this some time ago, when I first got curious about how professional market maker bots work:

LOL, I am not worried about newbies getting burned messing with that!

Post to be continued. Sorry, I was not joking in what I just wrote to vapourminer... limited writing abilities now, hahahah. I just want to make it absolutely clear for the recvord that newbies should not get the notion that they can beat the market with some fancy-pants trading strategy they found on the web, or got in a hot tip from whomever, or whatever.

What I was talking about requires a ton of maths. Institutional trading firms such as Blackrock hire people with university degrees in this field. You will not beat them with any trading strategy that can >99% of people could actually do. They will eat you alive. They will take all of your money. You will lose, and then you will cry just like me right now... what the hell did I do.........