|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
The fact that a lot of 'published' systems are morally and/or
logically bankrupt makes it easier for me to help other traders code
them into AFL, for educational purposes, (assuming that I have the
time and the skills).
It would be even easier for me if they made the effort to state their
problems in clear simple english or pseudocode and NOT tell me they
got this code from XYZ software OR 'The ABC Of Trading' book.
If others take a different moral stance and don't want to do that
then I respect their personal decision.
Hope they will respect mine.
Those who are asking are asking 'at their own risk' and I am posting
code 'at my own risk'.
brian_z
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Fred" <ftonetti@xxx> wrote:
>
> This is really a very simple subject ...
>
> Those that can Trade ...
>
> Those that can't sell a variety of systems, news letters, market
> sites etc etc.
>
> If you think about it why would anyone sell a system that had any
> probability of success for $300 ?
>
> What's a winning systems really worth ? ... Well if one had $1 mm
and
> a system that could make 20% per year on relatively small draw
downs
> even in enviornments like the last year or so then it's worth a
hell
> of a lot more than $300, isn't it ?
>
> The reality is good systems aren't sold, nor are they advertised
nor
> for the most part are they even discussed openly.
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "brian_z111" <brian_z111@> wrote:
> >
> > Yes, this is a very real problem in trading.
> >
> > The 'industry' already has nearly 100 years of history and
> thousands
> > of 'traders, many of whom have been armed with computers for a
> least
> > a decade, and are highly skilled analysts to boot, have been
> pouring
> > over the same data.
> >
> > As I said before, our field of endeavour is actually very small,
if
> > we confine our discussion to stock trading (exotic instruments
and
> IT
> > advances have added some refinements but the basics remain the
> same).
> >
> > To emphasise the point .... the trading universe is a very small
> > pool, and a relatively unimportant one at that .... IMO many of
us
> > take it, and our role as traders, far too seriously.
> >
> > Trading ideas and specific expressions of those ideas have
filtered
> > out from books, private conversations and trading material (free
or
> > sold) onto the internet where we all absorb this info without
> knowing
> > where it originated.
> >
> > Generally I find it a bit rich when a new crop comes along,
> > reassembles the info a little and claims it as original/copyright
> > material.
> >
> > I also find it a bit rich when they become uncomfortable about
the
> > fact that after they have sold their 'secret' it leaks out onto
the
> > net and then they want to claim privilige and scare off the
readers.
> >
> > Anyone who wants to keep a secret should start with keeping it
> > themselves.
> >
> >
> >
> > This is a very real issue.
> >
> > To provide an example.
> >
> > 4-5 years ago I purchase a 'trading system' from a USA mentor for
> > approx USD$300-400.
> >
> > The gentleman had an impressive an upstanding resume.
> >
> > The site was well presented and credible and the support was
> > excellent.
> >
> > The 'system' claimed a performance record of around ProfitFactor
=
> 2
> > and to be universal i.e. it worked in any timeframe and any
market.
> >
> > I signed a confidentiallity clause and purchased the 'system'.
> >
> > At their website they maintained a trading log for the system
with
> a
> > 12 month history (on the SPY I think).
> >
> > At the time I was using MetaStock ..... within a week or two I
had
> > backtested the system in MS and found I couldn't see anyway to
get
> > the system to perform as they claimed it did.
> >
> > Furthermore, when I tallied the trades recorded in their own log,
> it
> > didn't add up to PF 2 either ....more like 1.4. which I now
> > understand to be a typical statistical abherration of break even
> > systems.
> >
> > I duly sent them a friendly and helpful email, assuming I was
> > misunderstanding something.
> >
> > After a few days of silence the trading log came down from the
site
> > and a new system hit the headlines about two weeks later.
> >
> > On top of that, part of the system involved manual calculation
and
> > entry of some 'envelope' settings.
> >
> > I played around with the system in MS and luckily came across a
way
> > to automate, via simple code, the envelopes.
> >
> > I was going to 'give' the code to the guy but when I emailed him
> > about it to open the discussion there was another silence
followed
> by
> > a reply email congratulating me on my fine effort and claiming
> > that "they already had an automated algorithm for the envelopes,
in
> > beta and that it would soon be released".
> >
> > I spent many hours pouring over that 'system' and I still don't
> > believe it is a particularly profitable system.
> >
> > Furthermore it is not original but only a rehash of scores of
other
> > systems based on a few core trading principles.
> >
> >
> > The moral of the story:
> >
> > - I purchased a system and signed a 'copyright' agreement when I
> was
> > somewhat naive from a trading point of view
> > - the ethics of the situation don't compel me to honour the
> agreement
> > - legally I am obliged (just in case ... murky waters as Bill
says)
> > - I would like to post the system on this site but I might am
> > restricted
> >
> > In fact, on account of the agreement, the trading 'mentor' owns a
> > hackneyed, recycled system and has it locked up for years.
> >
> > He who publishes first and longest wins!
> >
> > IMO this is not a good outcome for the trading community.
> >
> > brian_z
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Michel Guibert <michelg14@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > If I follow all the copyright , I can't do anything , everybody
> has
> > done everything before me.
> > > Many formulas were published in many books or review and you
> think
> > there is copyright on them ???
> > > Personnaly when they are published in a review I consider them
in
> > the public domain.
> > >
> > > MG
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > To: amibroker@: ohneclue@: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 12:05:28 -
> > 0800Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: COPYRIGHT
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Whenever you write something, you own the copyright to it such -
-
> > even these posts are the IP of the individual poster and they own
> the
> > copyright to the contents. Yahoo does not own it, the group
owner
> > does not own it and in the Yahoo TOS, this is so stated.
> > >
> > > In another group that suffers from overt estrogen overloaded, 1
> > person wrote a guide, lifted whole posts of other members and put
> > them in her guide (without credit or permission) that she sold
and
> > was called on it. The person who was charging for the
information
> > had to refund money and revise her guide to be strictly and
> > exclusively her own words. That is an example of copyright
> violation.
> > >
> > > I use and quote George C Lane and his application of the
> stochastic
> > formula all the time and it is NOT a violation of copyright
because
> > the settings are mine that I have played around with, I give
credit
> > where I have learned something from someone else such as David
> > Elliott about stochastics settings, etc., and don't lift entire
> > paragraphs or words in the same series as their works. These are
> not
> > copyright violations. These come under the fair and free use
> concept.
> > >
> > > If I am discussing something from a trading book or manual that
> is
> > copyrighted and put it into my own words even though it is not
my
> > original idea, that is not a violation of copyright.
> > >
> > > If I write a book or prepare a PP presentation and pass the
work
> > off as my own when it is based on someone else's work and the
> charts
> > are THEIRS I lifted entirely, word for word or exactly the same
> > indicator settings, other than my own stochastic settings I've
> > developed, and sell it, that is a violation of copyright.
> > >
> > > The two elements are: passing stuff off as your own when you
> > copied it from someone else and selling it as your own idea.
> > >
> > > Judith
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: Barry Scarborough <razzbarry@>To: amibroker@: Friday,
> > December 19, 2008 10:32:28 PMSubject: [amibroker] Re: COPYRIGHT
> > >
> > > No. It appears there is a lot of confusion on copyright laws. A
> > good discussion is at http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Copyrights.
OF
> > course this isn't official but it is an easier read than the law
> > books. People like Wilder published his works so others could
> benefit
> > from his discoveries. What the copyright laws do is prevent
someone
> > from copying his work and selling it. But the intellectual
property
> > he disclosed is for our use. Why else would he publish it?Barry---
> In
> > amibroker@xxxxxxxxx ps.com, "binjobingo" <binjobingo@ ...>
wrote:>>
> > Does referring to Wilder's Relative strength Indicator,or Lane's>
> > Stochastics, or Chande's Vidya & so on lead to copyright
violation?
> >
> > > Say one reads An Author's book & am not able to write AFL for
> the>
> > Indicators & so ask the forum members to write it for me Is it>
> > copyright violation?> > If one give a link to the Website say
some
> > other website which> explains the parameters & use of the
> > said "indicator" but the website> may not be owned by the Author
> > himself does it lead to copyright> violation ?> > If it is so I
> think
> > all the forums would close down & nobody would> discuss their
> trading
> > strategy since trading strategies use some> Indicator by some
> author.>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
_________________________________________________________________
> > > Drag n' drop?Get easy photo sharing with Windows Live? Photos.
> > > http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowslive/photos.aspx
> > >
> >
>
------------------------------------
**** IMPORTANT ****
This group is for the discussion between users only.
This is *NOT* technical support channel.
*********************
TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to
SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
*********************
For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
For other support material please check also:
http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
*********************************
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:amibroker-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:amibroker-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|