Response to HackerNews comments on my trading • Hacker News Board

Re: Response to HackerNews comments on my trading

#21

Post by comboy » Wed, Nov 12, 2014, 11:05 PM UTC

opendais wrote: post #14

comboy wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> kinda works I think it does influence the market, but it cannot make them all profitable. Unless you think that group of TA believers act as a big pump and dump scheme (but I guess most markets are too big for that?)

Penny stocks [as the OP trades] wouldn't be. He tries to obscure it a little with things like "pink sheets" and acronyms but I don't think that is intentional. I'm guessing people just don't read the original article he is defending.

I read it, but wasn't aware of the difference. Thanks for the link and explanation in another comment.

Re: Response to HackerNews comments on my trading

#22

Post by opendais » Wed, Nov 12, 2014, 11:06 PM UTC

fleitz wrote: post #20

opendais wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but he is talking about trading penny stocks/pink sheets. He is on par with the people the "armchair economists" unless he is super wealthy and can prove it. You sure you want to act like he is a financial guru? "If you've been following penny stock trading circles on twitter for awhile, you'll know certain tales of legend were born on that day. One particular trader profited $1.2 million in a day. When that man…

HFT on fucking pink sheets? LULZ. What about the HFT risk from getting goods for free on CL and reselling them back to CL?

Like I said, if it really was how it worked someone would find a way to automate it. :P

I suppose I could have been more verbose. I tend to use acronyms sometimes and not think through that it could be read differently than I intended.

Re: Response to HackerNews comments on my trading

#23

Post by fleitz » Wed, Nov 12, 2014, 11:11 PM UTC

opendais wrote: post #22

fleitz wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HFT on fucking pink sheets? LULZ. What about the HFT risk from getting goods for free on CL and reselling them back to CL?

Like I said, if it really was how it worked someone would find a way to automate it. :P I suppose I could have been more verbose. I tend to use acronyms sometimes and not think through that it could be read differently than I intended.

Yeah, I was once considering building an OTCBB trader that would trade all the pennystock promo bullshit and see which (if any) lists actually worked and just trade the spam. The amount of degenerate gamblers in that industry is insane.

Almost built a claim jumping / claim expiry bot for mineral titles. Claim expires tomorrow? Grab it at 9 AM? Claims made today? Stake the blocks around them.

I think anyone with half a brain would clean up on OTCBB with a little automation.

Re: Response to HackerNews comments on my trading

#24

Post by poopsintub » Wed, Nov 12, 2014, 11:17 PM UTC

eastbayjake wrote: post #5

I think the big complaint was that your post was titled "How I lost a shit-ton of money in one day" but the content was "How I started making some money on OTC trades and got on a leaderboard at work" -- felt click-baited.

Full of himself, b.s. trader can't even make a blog title correctly. No wonder he lost thousands of dollars by accident, then couldn't even finish the last 3/4 of his story. Not to mention leaving out the most interesting part.

Re: Response to HackerNews comments on my trading

#25

Post by fleitz » Wed, Nov 12, 2014, 11:22 PM UTC

howeyc wrote: post #6

Do TA proponents ever talk about the suggestions that the reason TA works is because of a feedback cycle? That is, if you get enough people with enough influence (cash) all believing they can read tea leaves, and make similar movements based on that, it kinda works.

Not only are you now a TA pro, but you can also trade real estate, and run the Federal Reserve.

This is why the counter-cyclical guys only make money when the bubble bursts. (Berkshire always underperforms in the boom, but makes it up in spades in the bust)

Re: Response to HackerNews comments on my trading

#26

Post by jMyles » Wed, Nov 12, 2014, 11:23 PM UTC

Am I the only one who sees this entire story as decidedly "un-hackerly?"

On one hand, OP chides commenters for describing trades as "coin flips" (this is apparently some sort of composite as he quotes no individual commenter in saying this). Then expresses the following transparent cognitive dissonance:

> Trades are not binary outcomes like coinflips. If you think someone with a consistent 70% win rate...

Well, if trades are not binary, what is a "win rate?"

OP makes no mention of the 'hack' here - namely, the underlying systemic outcome of this conduct. Are the companies whose stock is at issue ethically sound? Are they promoting open source and free thought? If they aren't, and if their value is the metric, how can any gains be regarded as a "win?"

Perhaps in a self-enriching sense, but self-enrichment isn't per se a 'hack.'

Re: Response to HackerNews comments on my trading

#27

Post by ohsnap » Wed, Nov 12, 2014, 11:30 PM UTC

fiatmoney wrote: post #16

There is a pretty solid hypothesis that when traders talk about "reading a chart", they are not in fact using easily explainable patterns, but rather more hardcore estimations of market psychology, derived via the brain's rather robust pattern-finding machinery. The chart patterns are more of a mnemonic than a decision rule in and of themselves.

reading a chart quickly turns into reading tea leaves and other forms of divination that people are so prone to. There is just no science there. it's better to know our brains are poorly wired for understanding the risk of trading.

Re: Response to HackerNews comments on my trading

#28

Post by saalweachter » Wed, Nov 12, 2014, 11:56 PM UTC

fiatmoney wrote: post #16

There is a pretty solid hypothesis that when traders talk about "reading a chart", they are not in fact using easily explainable patterns, but rather more hardcore estimations of market psychology, derived via the brain's rather robust pattern-finding machinery. The chart patterns are more of a mnemonic than a decision rule in and of themselves.

Pattern matching has its own risks.

My favorite story is a study that involved trying to predict the outcome of a 1:2 random distribution. Pull a random card from an infinite deck, 1/3rd of the time it's black, 2/3rds of the time it's red. The optimum strategy is to guess red all of the time; you will be right 2/3rds of the time. Humans have a tendency to try to match the random number generator, guessing red 2/3rds of the time and black 1/3rd of the time, which is sub-optimal, and you're only correct 5/9ths of the time.

We're powerful pattern matchers, yes: we can observe a 1:2 random distribution and mimic it pretty accurately. But we're also a little stupid: we think it's a good idea to do so.

Re: Response to HackerNews comments on my trading

#29

Post by buckbova » Thu, Nov 13, 2014, 12:22 AM UTC

fleitz wrote: post #23

opendais wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like I said, if it really was how it worked someone would find a way to automate it. :P I suppose I could have been more verbose. I tend to use acronyms sometimes and not think through that it could be read differently than I intended.

Yeah, I was once considering building an OTCBB trader that would trade all the pennystock promo bullshit and see which (if any) lists actually worked and just trade the spam. The amount of degenerate gamblers in that industry is insane. Almost built a claim jumping / claim expiry bot for mineral titles. Claim expires tomorrow? Grab it at 9 AM? Claims made today? Stake the blocks around them. I think anyone with half…

You'd think so but the problem is volume. When it's time to buy you can't get enough shares at the price you want and when it's time to sell, there's no buyers.

I used to trade pennies for fun, because maybe I was one of those degenerate gamblers. Options trading can be just as much fun.

Re: Response to HackerNews comments on my trading

#30

Post by yzzxy » Thu, Nov 13, 2014, 12:24 AM UTC

saalweachter wrote: post #28

fiatmoney wrote: post #16

There is a pretty solid hypothesis that when traders talk about "reading a chart", they are not in fact using easily explainable patterns, but rather more hardcore estimations of market psychology, derived via the brain's rather robust pattern-finding machinery. The chart patterns are more of a mnemonic than a decision rule in and of themselves.

Pattern matching has its own risks. My favorite story is a study that involved trying to predict the outcome of a 1:2 random distribution. Pull a random card from an infinite deck, 1/3rd of the time it's black, 2/3rds of the time it's red. The optimum strategy is to guess red all of the time; you will be right 2/3rds of the time. Humans have a tendency to try to match the random number generator, guessing red 2/3rds…

Maybe traders have learned on an intuitive level to "fix" this pattern matching - clearly the processing circuitry / power / ability is there, so a trained difference in outlook could allow us to harness it properly.