|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Most people look for the holy grail , that will solve all of their trading problems,
trade station does exectely that,,,
it follow your stop loss,, instead of:I should have,Ii did not think it will go that low,,, etc
and it is also fully mechanical in taking profits,
The other thing is,,, when you have something that works,, you say,, it cant be right 4 times in a raw,, and you stop using it,,
and that is when you start loosing money,,
just because a system stop working,, you do NOT stop trading it,,
(if anything was 100% accurate they will be billioners) ----- Original Message ----- From: "G. Fredrick Nowatzke"
Date: Thursday, October 11, 2007 11:00 pm
Subject: Re: [xlt] OT - TradeStation 2000i
To: xltraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Pete,
>
> Yes, the Black Boxes.... here you have someone with something
> valuable enough to keep secret, or they want you to think that,
> which may be the result of investment ands skill far beyond what
> any
> one person could do. If it was marketed on a basis that pegged
> the
> cost to the actual trading results obtained you'd have a
> balanced
> economic equation.
>
> Many of the open tools sets you refer to are popular but the results
> achieved by most users are marginal. I know one fellow who goes
> from
> TradeStation to MetaStock to something else every time he looses
> his
> shirt in the market on the assumption there must be a
> shortcoming in
> the tool as opposed to in the mind and skill of the tool user.
>
> Jerry
>
>
>
> --- In xltraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Peter Gum" wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jason,
> >
> >
> >
> > That is an endless and ongoing dialog between the tool maker
> and
> the tool
> > user. (You should look at the 'want' list some vendors
> maintain.)
> The trader
> > uses what is available today to accomplish his ends, but when
> he
> goes to
> > 'home depot' next month there will be something new. The first
> guy
> with the
> > new tool is likely going to have a temporary edge over
> previous
> technology,
> > but that does not mean that previous technology could not be used
> > effectively.
> >
> >
> >
> > It is helpful to maintain a distinction between tools and
> 'black
> box'
> > strategies. Tools (or platforms) are things that can be manipulated
> > innovatively by traders. "Black Boxes" are things that
> disallow
> intellectual
> > value-add by the user. Even so, it is worth keeping an eye on
> the
> degree of
> > success; i.e., there are shades of gray in the returns generated.
> >
> >
> >
> > Pete
> >
> >
> >
> > My permanent (forwarding) email address: petergum@xxx
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xltraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:xltraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf
> > Of Jason Linden
> > Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 3:35 PM
> > To: xltraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [xlt] OT - TradeStation 2000i
> >
> >
> >
> > But how can the developer create a package without knowing
> what the
> trader
> > is looking for?
> >
> > On 10/11/07, Peter Gum < petergum@xxxxxx
> > oberlin.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Jerry,
> >
> >
> >
> > This is an easy one. The confusion is between the hammer and
> the
> carpenter.
> > The magic is in what different carpenters can do with the
> hammer.
> One
> > carpenter can build hammers but is not skilled in their uses.
> The
> other
> > carpenter has a different skill building houses. Thus all 4 of your
> > alternatives are valid, depending on the skills and
> capabilities of
> the
> > carpenter contemplating them. More simply, there are
> extraordinarily skilled
> > programmers that do not have the temperament for trading. But their
> > platforms in the hands of a skilled trader can be an effective
> combination,
> > where neither party fully understands how the other party actually
> > accomplishes what they do.
> >
> >
> >
> > Your last paragraph has it wrong imo. The programmer deserves
> compensation
> > for the part of the combination he creates.
> >
> >
> >
> > Pete
> >
> >
> >
> > My permanent (forwarding) email address: petergum@xxxxxx
> > oberlin.edu
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: xltraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:xltraders@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > com] On Behalf Of G. Fredrick Nowatzke
> >
> > Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 2:12 PM
> > To: xltraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [xlt] OT - TradeStation 2000i
> >
> >
> >
> > Pete,
> >
> > OK, to clarify a bit.
> >
> > If you go on a long journey (develop sophisticated software)
> to an
> > area where you suspect gold can be found (the markets), with a
> supply
> > of picks and shovels and mules (working software) do you:
> >
> > 1) Set up a retail store selling the same and wait for others
> to
> come
> > along who need your service, without ever looking for the gold?
> >
> > 2) Look for the gold yourself and having failed to find any,
> sell
> > your prospecting tools to the next guy to come along, and then
> figure
> > perhaps you can make some money in retail mining supplies?
> >
> > 3) Look for the gold yourself and having found it, keep mining
> it
> > till it runs out and not go into retail mining supplies?
> >
> > 4) Look for the gold yourself and having found it, leave it in
> the
> > dirt, go back down the mountain and go into retail mining
> supplies
> > with a big sign pointing up the mountain, saying "The gold is
> up
> > there ====> Buy your mule here!".....?
> >
> > The essence of my perspective being if the very skilled people
> who
> > develop the retail software could make money with it, they
> would,
> as
> > opposed to becoming shopkeepers selling mining supplies.
> >
> > I once presented this logic to a fellow at a trade show trying
> to
> > sell a $3,000 trading package that he claimed to have made a
> lot of
> > money with. When I asked why he was selling it, he said that
> "Jesus
> > told me to". When I quoted the Bible about giving what you
> have to
> > the poor (small time traders like me) he turned red and walked
> away
> > without a word.
> >
> > Jerry
> >
> > --- In xltraders@xxxxxxxxx
>
> ps.com,
> > "Peter Gum" wrote:
> > >
> > > I have been just watching this for awhile, but that analogy
> looks
> > to me like
> > > it misfired.
> > >
> > > You sell the mule, pick and shovel to the prospector who
> thinks
> he
> > knows
> > > where the gold is. He needs the resources so he can dig and
> he
> > won't tell
> > > you where that is. You don't know there is no gold because
> you
> > don't know
> > > where he is going.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Pete
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > My permanent (forwarding) email address: petergum@
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: xltraders@xxxxxxxxx
>
> ps.com
> > [mailto:xltraders@xxxxxxxxx
>
> ps.com]
> > On Behalf
> > > Of G. Fredrick Nowatzke
> > > Sent: Thursday, October 11, 2007 11:46 AM
> > > To: xltraders@xxxxxxxxx
> ps.com
> > > Subject: Re: [xlt] OT - TradeStation 2000i
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > A good point, but in all things let the buyer beware.
> > >
> > > Especially in software sold to investors. Logically if the
> product
> > > had the features and capacity to engender the development of
> a
> > > winning trading strategy, superior to what can be done in
> other
> > > products or from custom development, why sell it?
> > >
> > > Instead of investing in marketing, customer support and all
> the
> > > things that are required for retail distribution, invest the
> > capital
> > > in the market and make huge profits. One has to assume that
> > whatever
> > > is sold has been determined by the seller to be ineffective
> at
> > > actually trading the market with significant and consistent
> > profits.
> > > Else why sell it to anyone?
> > >
> > > It's kinda like selling a mule, pick and shovel to gold
> prospectors
> > > in an area where you know there isn't nay gold to be found.
> > Otherwise
> > > you'd take your prospecting equipment and prospect yourself.
> > >
> > > How many here actually make a significant and sole income
> from
> any
> > of
> > > these products?
> > >
> > > I suspect not above 1% of the list membership if that.
> > >
> > > Jerry
> > >
> >
>
>
> ![]()
__,_._,___
|