Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Alan Oppenheim, MIT professor: "Every trader alive uses a moving average. Almost none of them know it's a filter, and funds pay quants $600K for the version they were never taught." a moving average is a filter. it smooths a jumpy price to reveal the slower signal hiding underneath....

Rossst_03's profile picture

Rossst.03

3,144 subscribers

214,907 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

Bilim & TeknolojiFinans
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Alan Oppenheim, MIT professor: "Jump Trading pays quants $650K to pull one real signal out of market noise. I wrote the textbook on that exact math and taught it for free." this free MIT lecture is the math the whole "quant edge" is built on, and almost nobody selling you a course will name it. the man teaching it wrote the signal-processing textbook every engineer on earth learned from, and he put the lectures online for nothing. here is the idea. a price chart is a signal buried in noise. most of what you see is random static, and hidden inside is a faint, repeating pattern with real mathematics for pulling it out. that is not a metaphor. jim simons was a codebreaker who did exactly this to enemy transmissions, then pointed the same math at the market and made a hundred billion dollars. none of it is new. oppenheim taught this in 1987, the math is older, and every lecture is free. same story i told in the article above. the edge was never a secret formula. it was knowing a market is a noisy signal, and having the tools to read it. here is what the gurus skip. the math to separate signal from noise is free and everyone has it. the edge is cleaner data than the next desk, and the discipline to trust a faint signal across thousands of trades instead of chasing the static. the filter is free. the patience to use it is not.
29:44

Alan Oppenheim, MIT professor: "Jump Trading pays quants $650K to pull one real signal out of market noise. I wrote the textbook on that exact math and taught it for free." this free MIT lecture is the math the whole "quant edge" is built on, and almost nobody selling you a course will name it. the man teaching it wrote the signal-processing textbook every engineer on earth learned from, and he put the lectures online for nothing. here is the idea. a price chart is a signal buried in noise. most of what you see is random static, and hidden inside is a faint, repeating pattern with real mathematics for pulling it out. that is not a metaphor. jim simons was a codebreaker who did exactly this to enemy transmissions, then pointed the same math at the market and made a hundred billion dollars. none of it is new. oppenheim taught this in 1987, the math is older, and every lecture is free. same story i told in the article above. the edge was never a secret formula. it was knowing a market is a noisy signal, and having the tools to read it. here is what the gurus skip. the math to separate signal from noise is free and everyone has it. the edge is cleaner data than the next desk, and the discipline to trust a faint signal across thousands of trades instead of chasing the static. the filter is free. the patience to use it is not.

Rossst.03

281,905 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Claude Shannon ran his personal stock account at 28% a year for 30 years. He's also the man who mathematically proved the ceiling above every filter the thread above is selling. Both facts have been sitting in the same library since 1948. Shannon didn't beat the market with a smarter moving average. He didn't beat it with a swarm, a neural net, or the sharpest filter of his generation, and he could have built any of them in an afternoon. He beat it because he understood the one thing the industry has been quietly ignoring for 78 years: no filter, no matter how clever, can pull more signal from a channel than the channel actually holds. The market channel is almost pure noise by design. Every real edge gets arbitraged toward zero the moment enough people find it. A better filter doesn't create signal that wasn't there - it rounds noise into a shape that fools you into betting on it. Shannon compounded like that because he was ruthless about which channels still had signal left, and disciplined about how much to bet when they did. The filter came last. It always comes last. Build the filter. It's a fine tool. Just remember there's a ceiling above it no engineering can lift, and the part that finds signal before it decays - that part, you still have to bring yourself. Shannon wrote it down in 1948. It's still free. The lesson has been sitting there for 78 years.
29:44

Claude Shannon ran his personal stock account at 28% a year for 30 years. He's also the man who mathematically proved the ceiling above every filter the thread above is selling. Both facts have been sitting in the same library since 1948. Shannon didn't beat the market with a smarter moving average. He didn't beat it with a swarm, a neural net, or the sharpest filter of his generation, and he could have built any of them in an afternoon. He beat it because he understood the one thing the industry has been quietly ignoring for 78 years: no filter, no matter how clever, can pull more signal from a channel than the channel actually holds. The market channel is almost pure noise by design. Every real edge gets arbitraged toward zero the moment enough people find it. A better filter doesn't create signal that wasn't there - it rounds noise into a shape that fools you into betting on it. Shannon compounded like that because he was ruthless about which channels still had signal left, and disciplined about how much to bet when they did. The filter came last. It always comes last. Build the filter. It's a fine tool. Just remember there's a ceiling above it no engineering can lift, and the part that finds signal before it decays - that part, you still have to bring yourself. Shannon wrote it down in 1948. It's still free. The lesson has been sitting there for 78 years.

Veles

207,290 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Persi Diaconis, Stanford mathematician and former professional magician: "I've spent my life on two tricks: making a rigged deck look random, and making a random one look rigged. The market is the first trick, and almost nobody catches it." this free lecture asks one question, does anything happen at random, and the answer is: far less than you think. and the man asking isn't a trader. he's a stanford professor and former professional magician who spent his life proving how badly humans read randomness. the market is his first trick in the wild. it looks like pure chance, yet buried inside is a faint rig, a 50.75% tilt no eye can see. your gut reads a losing week as a broken system and a hot streak as skill, and it's wrong both times. the tilt is invisible to human intuition, which is exactly why funds hand the decision to the math. none of it is hidden. diaconis has taught it for decades, the probability goes back to 1713, and the lecture is free. same point the thread makes: the 50.75% is real, but it lives inside noise your gut will always misread. here is the trap. you feel every win and every loss, but you cannot feel the average, and the average is the only thing that pays. it takes thousands of trades for a 51% edge to separate from luck, and almost everyone quits long before then. the math is free. the patience to trust it past your own eyes is the edge.
1:23:57

Persi Diaconis, Stanford mathematician and former professional magician: "I've spent my life on two tricks: making a rigged deck look random, and making a random one look rigged. The market is the first trick, and almost nobody catches it." this free lecture asks one question, does anything happen at random, and the answer is: far less than you think. and the man asking isn't a trader. he's a stanford professor and former professional magician who spent his life proving how badly humans read randomness. the market is his first trick in the wild. it looks like pure chance, yet buried inside is a faint rig, a 50.75% tilt no eye can see. your gut reads a losing week as a broken system and a hot streak as skill, and it's wrong both times. the tilt is invisible to human intuition, which is exactly why funds hand the decision to the math. none of it is hidden. diaconis has taught it for decades, the probability goes back to 1713, and the lecture is free. same point the thread makes: the 50.75% is real, but it lives inside noise your gut will always misread. here is the trap. you feel every win and every loss, but you cannot feel the average, and the average is the only thing that pays. it takes thousands of trades for a 51% edge to separate from luck, and almost everyone quits long before then. the math is free. the patience to trust it past your own eyes is the edge.

Rossst.03

216,635 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Yilin Wang, MIT mathematician and one of the leading minds on the geometry of randomness: "there is a precise number for how far a shape is from pure chance. Citadel pays $500,000 to people who compute it instead of guessing it." her field is the mathematics of random curves. flip enough coins and the path they trace is not shapeless. it has a precise geometry, and a number, the Loewner energy, that measures how far a curve sits from pure chance. a circle scores zero. it is the most natural thing randomness can draw. almost every shape you see on a chart scores near zero too. it is noise wearing a costume. this is the entire quant problem in one idea. the market draws millions of random curves, and only a vanishing few carry real structure. the edge is a rigorous way to tell the costume from the signal. Citadel pay $500,000 a year for people who can measure that difference instead of feeling it. the trader who falls in love with a pattern is admiring a curve that randomness would have drawn anyway. the shape was never the edge. the odds that randomness did not draw it were.
1:50:26

Yilin Wang, MIT mathematician and one of the leading minds on the geometry of randomness: "there is a precise number for how far a shape is from pure chance. Citadel pays $500,000 to people who compute it instead of guessing it." her field is the mathematics of random curves. flip enough coins and the path they trace is not shapeless. it has a precise geometry, and a number, the Loewner energy, that measures how far a curve sits from pure chance. a circle scores zero. it is the most natural thing randomness can draw. almost every shape you see on a chart scores near zero too. it is noise wearing a costume. this is the entire quant problem in one idea. the market draws millions of random curves, and only a vanishing few carry real structure. the edge is a rigorous way to tell the costume from the signal. Citadel pay $500,000 a year for people who can measure that difference instead of feeling it. the trader who falls in love with a pattern is admiring a curve that randomness would have drawn anyway. the shape was never the edge. the odds that randomness did not draw it were.

Rossst.03

58,891 görüntüleme • 8 gün önce

Moving averages are not support. They are math. Scot1and, a trader and educator who builds his entire framework around price and auction activity, breaks down why this distinction is critical. A moving average has no participants behind it. A price congestion zone does — real volume, real transactions, real memory baked into the chart. When those two things coincide and the moving average holds, traders credit the indicator when they should credit the zone. When they diverge, traders get hurt holding a level that was never real to begin with. Real support is where the market has already done business. That is the only line worth watching.
2:32

Moving averages are not support. They are math. Scot1and, a trader and educator who builds his entire framework around price and auction activity, breaks down why this distinction is critical. A moving average has no participants behind it. A price congestion zone does — real volume, real transactions, real memory baked into the chart. When those two things coincide and the moving average holds, traders credit the indicator when they should credit the zone. When they diverge, traders get hurt holding a level that was never real to begin with. Real support is where the market has already done business. That is the only line worth watching.

TraderLion

14,604 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Fourier wrapped a signal around a circle in 1822. Every Spotify equalizer, every noise filter in your AirPods, and every frequency layer inside ChatGPT runs on what he found. The trick is simple. Spin the signal at different speeds. When the spin matches a hidden frequency, the center of mass shifts. That shift is the answer. Claude and GPT use this same idea to separate relevant tokens from noise. 20 minutes. Bookmark & watch today. The math is older than the telephone.
19:36

Fourier wrapped a signal around a circle in 1822. Every Spotify equalizer, every noise filter in your AirPods, and every frequency layer inside ChatGPT runs on what he found. The trick is simple. Spin the signal at different speeds. When the spin matches a hidden frequency, the center of mass shifts. That shift is the answer. Claude and GPT use this same idea to separate relevant tokens from noise. 20 minutes. Bookmark & watch today. The math is older than the telephone.

Eron

57,431 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

A Stanford mathematician who spent 10 years as a professional magician just described the market in one sentence: "I've spent my life on two tricks: making a rigged deck look random, and making a random one look rigged. The market is the first trick, and almost nobody catches it." That's Persi Diaconis. He has a free lecture that asks one question: does anything actually happen at random? The answer is: far less than you think. The market is his first trick in the wild. It looks like pure chance. Buried inside is a faint rig, a 50.75% tilt no eye can see. Your gut reads a losing week as a broken system and a hot streak as skill. Wrong both times. The tilt is invisible to human intuition, which is exactly why funds hand the decision to the math. None of it is hidden. Diaconis has taught it for decades. The probability goes back to 1713. The lecture is free. Here's the trap: you feel every win and every loss, but you cannot feel the average. And the average is the only thing that pays. It takes thousands of trades for a 51% edge to separate from luck, and almost everyone quits long before then. The math is free. The patience to trust it past your own eyes is the edge.
1:23:57

A Stanford mathematician who spent 10 years as a professional magician just described the market in one sentence: "I've spent my life on two tricks: making a rigged deck look random, and making a random one look rigged. The market is the first trick, and almost nobody catches it." That's Persi Diaconis. He has a free lecture that asks one question: does anything actually happen at random? The answer is: far less than you think. The market is his first trick in the wild. It looks like pure chance. Buried inside is a faint rig, a 50.75% tilt no eye can see. Your gut reads a losing week as a broken system and a hot streak as skill. Wrong both times. The tilt is invisible to human intuition, which is exactly why funds hand the decision to the math. None of it is hidden. Diaconis has taught it for decades. The probability goes back to 1713. The lecture is free. Here's the trap: you feel every win and every loss, but you cannot feel the average. And the average is the only thing that pays. It takes thousands of trades for a 51% edge to separate from luck, and almost everyone quits long before then. The math is free. The patience to trust it past your own eyes is the edge.

Veles

2,188,032 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Terence Tao, UCLA professor and the most decorated mathematician alive: "Hedge funds hand you $750K a year for a single skill: telling a real pattern from noise. I've spent a lifetime on it, and almost everyone has it flipped." this free lecture is the entire "find the signal" problem those firms are paying for, delivered at UCLA by the most awarded mathematician alive and put online for nothing. at the chalkboard it's plain. Tao's lifelong idea is that almost nothing is purely one thing. there's flawless structure, like a clock, and flawless randomness, like a coin toss, and nearly everything real sits somewhere between the two. the work is pulling them apart. the primes are the cleanest test. they look scattered and lawless, yet Tao and Ben Green proved they hold evenly spaced runs of any length you ask for. order was buried inside the apparent chaos the whole time. that's "signal detection" with the marketing stripped off. he gave this at UCLA and it has stayed free ever since. exactly the point of the article above: the mathematics those firms pay half a million for is public, written down and free to anyone tonight. the lecture costs nothing and anyone can press play. what no one can sell you is the judgment to tell when a pattern is real and when your own eyes invented it. that judgment is the entire job, and it takes years to earn.
45:02

Terence Tao, UCLA professor and the most decorated mathematician alive: "Hedge funds hand you $750K a year for a single skill: telling a real pattern from noise. I've spent a lifetime on it, and almost everyone has it flipped." this free lecture is the entire "find the signal" problem those firms are paying for, delivered at UCLA by the most awarded mathematician alive and put online for nothing. at the chalkboard it's plain. Tao's lifelong idea is that almost nothing is purely one thing. there's flawless structure, like a clock, and flawless randomness, like a coin toss, and nearly everything real sits somewhere between the two. the work is pulling them apart. the primes are the cleanest test. they look scattered and lawless, yet Tao and Ben Green proved they hold evenly spaced runs of any length you ask for. order was buried inside the apparent chaos the whole time. that's "signal detection" with the marketing stripped off. he gave this at UCLA and it has stayed free ever since. exactly the point of the article above: the mathematics those firms pay half a million for is public, written down and free to anyone tonight. the lecture costs nothing and anyone can press play. what no one can sell you is the judgment to tell when a pattern is real and when your own eyes invented it. that judgment is the entire job, and it takes years to earn.

Loran

790,454 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

The best signal is sometimes NO signal. That is why I do not trade when Intelligent Balance shows less than 60%. Below 60% means one thing to me: NO CLEAR EDGE. And that is exactly where most traders destroy their account. They see a sweep. They see an iFVG. They see CISD. They convince themselves there is a trade. But without a strong more probable side, the setup has no real filter. For me: 60%+ = I have a side to focus on. Below 60% = I protect capital. Simple. Intelligent Balance is not only there to tell me where to trade. It is there to tell me when NOT to trade. Because forcing trades in a low-edge environment is not trading. It is gambling with extra steps. Would you skip a session if the indicator told you there is no clear edge?
0:41

The best signal is sometimes NO signal. That is why I do not trade when Intelligent Balance shows less than 60%. Below 60% means one thing to me: NO CLEAR EDGE. And that is exactly where most traders destroy their account. They see a sweep. They see an iFVG. They see CISD. They convince themselves there is a trade. But without a strong more probable side, the setup has no real filter. For me: 60%+ = I have a side to focus on. Below 60% = I protect capital. Simple. Intelligent Balance is not only there to tell me where to trade. It is there to tell me when NOT to trade. Because forcing trades in a low-edge environment is not trading. It is gambling with extra steps. Would you skip a session if the indicator told you there is no clear edge?

Herman Trading

19,182 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Terence Tao, UCLA professor and the most decorated mathematician alive: "Funds pay $750K to combine weak signals into one real edge. I proved the thing that makes it work and makes it dangerous: in any long enough sequence, hidden structure is unavoidable. it always accumulates. the whole job is telling the real structure from the noise that only looks like it." this free lecture is the most decorated mathematician alive on the exact problem sitting underneath every factor model, and it costs nothing. at the board it's simple. Tao's lifelong theme is the line between structure and randomness. The Erdős discrepancy problem asks a deceptively simple thing: can you write an endless string of plus-ones and minus-ones that stays perfectly balanced forever? Tao proved you cannot. No matter how cleverly you try, imbalance, hidden structure, is forced to accumulate as the sequence grows. There is no such thing as a long stream of pure, structureless noise. That's the whole idea, minus the jargon. Which is exactly why a multi-factor model can work, and exactly why it can kill you. Stack enough weak signals and real structure will appear, because at scale structure is unavoidable. But so will fake structure, patterns that exist only because the data is long enough to force them. Same point as the post above: finding structure is guaranteed. Knowing which structure is an edge is the rare and expensive part. the mathematics is free and public. what nobody can sell you is the judgment to tell the structure the market will pay you for from the structure that exists only because you looked hard enough. That judgment is the alpha, and it takes years to build.
51:34

Terence Tao, UCLA professor and the most decorated mathematician alive: "Funds pay $750K to combine weak signals into one real edge. I proved the thing that makes it work and makes it dangerous: in any long enough sequence, hidden structure is unavoidable. it always accumulates. the whole job is telling the real structure from the noise that only looks like it." this free lecture is the most decorated mathematician alive on the exact problem sitting underneath every factor model, and it costs nothing. at the board it's simple. Tao's lifelong theme is the line between structure and randomness. The Erdős discrepancy problem asks a deceptively simple thing: can you write an endless string of plus-ones and minus-ones that stays perfectly balanced forever? Tao proved you cannot. No matter how cleverly you try, imbalance, hidden structure, is forced to accumulate as the sequence grows. There is no such thing as a long stream of pure, structureless noise. That's the whole idea, minus the jargon. Which is exactly why a multi-factor model can work, and exactly why it can kill you. Stack enough weak signals and real structure will appear, because at scale structure is unavoidable. But so will fake structure, patterns that exist only because the data is long enough to force them. Same point as the post above: finding structure is guaranteed. Knowing which structure is an edge is the rare and expensive part. the mathematics is free and public. what nobody can sell you is the judgment to tell the structure the market will pay you for from the structure that exists only because you looked hard enough. That judgment is the alpha, and it takes years to build.

Rossst.03

213,931 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

YuanYuan Xu, one of the sharpest young Chinese mathematicians working in probability: "PDT Partners pays a math PhD $500,000 a year for one skill: proving when a winning streak is real edge and when it is just luck. that proof is the exact thing this mathematician writes on a chalkboard, and it costs nothing" this free lecture is the math that tells you whether your edge is real or you are fooling yourself. strip away the P&L screenshots and one question decides everything. after N bets, how far can your results drift from your true win rate by pure chance. there is a precise answer. it is called a concentration inequality, and it puts a hard bound on how much luck can flatter you or wreck you over a run. it is why 10 wins prove nothing and 10,000 prove almost everything. Xu builds it from zero, on a chalkboard in Brazil, in notation a beginner can follow. a Chinese mathematician handing out the exact tool funds use to tell skill from noise. Wall Street rents this out as a $500,000 edge. a mathematician at a chalkboard hands you the proof in English for free.
1:26:25

YuanYuan Xu, one of the sharpest young Chinese mathematicians working in probability: "PDT Partners pays a math PhD $500,000 a year for one skill: proving when a winning streak is real edge and when it is just luck. that proof is the exact thing this mathematician writes on a chalkboard, and it costs nothing" this free lecture is the math that tells you whether your edge is real or you are fooling yourself. strip away the P&L screenshots and one question decides everything. after N bets, how far can your results drift from your true win rate by pure chance. there is a precise answer. it is called a concentration inequality, and it puts a hard bound on how much luck can flatter you or wreck you over a run. it is why 10 wins prove nothing and 10,000 prove almost everything. Xu builds it from zero, on a chalkboard in Brazil, in notation a beginner can follow. a Chinese mathematician handing out the exact tool funds use to tell skill from noise. Wall Street rents this out as a $500,000 edge. a mathematician at a chalkboard hands you the proof in English for free.

Rossst.03

16,333 görüntüleme • 14 gün önce

Is it worth it? That next level you’re chasing — the one that separates the average from the elite — doesn’t come without a price. The real question is: What are you willing to do to get there?
0:43

Is it worth it? That next level you’re chasing — the one that separates the average from the elite — doesn’t come without a price. The real question is: What are you willing to do to get there?

Chris Pronger

69,081 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Persi Diaconis, Stanford mathematician and former professional magician: "I spent fifty years proving one thing: almost nothing is as random as it looks. The 50.75% that built Renaissance wasn't luck. It was a tiny crack in the randomness, found and repeated a million times." this free lecture holds the exact idea the thread above is built on. and the man giving it isn't a trader. he's a stanford professor and former professional magician who spent his career on one question: where does real randomness end, and where does a hidden edge begin. here is his life's finding. a coin, a shuffle, a market, all look random, yet each hides a faint, measurable bias. on its own that bias is nothing, indistinguishable from luck. repeat it enough times and it stops being luck and becomes a law. that faint crack, found and repeated, is the whole distance between a 50.75% win rate and a hundred billion dollars. none of this is new or hidden. diaconis has taught it for decades, the math runs back to 1713, and the lecture is free. i mapped the full system in my article, expected value, kelly, and this. same point the thread makes: the edge was sitting in plain sight. here is the part the gurus skip. a faint edge only pays if you survive long enough to reach it, and that takes correct sizing and the patience to trust it through thousands of losing-looking trades. most quit while it still looks like randomness. the math is free. the nerve to hold it is the edge.
48:41

Persi Diaconis, Stanford mathematician and former professional magician: "I spent fifty years proving one thing: almost nothing is as random as it looks. The 50.75% that built Renaissance wasn't luck. It was a tiny crack in the randomness, found and repeated a million times." this free lecture holds the exact idea the thread above is built on. and the man giving it isn't a trader. he's a stanford professor and former professional magician who spent his career on one question: where does real randomness end, and where does a hidden edge begin. here is his life's finding. a coin, a shuffle, a market, all look random, yet each hides a faint, measurable bias. on its own that bias is nothing, indistinguishable from luck. repeat it enough times and it stops being luck and becomes a law. that faint crack, found and repeated, is the whole distance between a 50.75% win rate and a hundred billion dollars. none of this is new or hidden. diaconis has taught it for decades, the math runs back to 1713, and the lecture is free. i mapped the full system in my article, expected value, kelly, and this. same point the thread makes: the edge was sitting in plain sight. here is the part the gurus skip. a faint edge only pays if you survive long enough to reach it, and that takes correct sizing and the patience to trust it through thousands of losing-looking trades. most quit while it still looks like randomness. the math is free. the nerve to hold it is the edge.

Rossst.03

231,067 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

David MacKay, Cambridge professor: "Citadel and Jane Street pay $900K for people who get one idea I taught free at Cambridge: information is measurable, and whoever measures it best wins. the casino knew it first. the machines know it now." this free lecture holds the entire "secret alpha" the funds and the AI gurus sell, and the man teaching it put his whole course and his whole book online for free and never locked a single page. at the board it's simple. information is just how much a signal cuts your uncertainty, and you can measure it in exact bits. the more an edge shrinks what you don't know, the more it is worth, and Shannon proved there is a hard ceiling on how fast you can compound it into money. that is the whole "edge", and the whole "AI magic", minus the marketing. MacKay taught it at Cambridge and gave the book away free in 2003. it has been free ever since. same point as the casino piece above: the house wins with a small, measurable edge, repeated and sized right, not with a secret. the theory is free and every fund and every model already runs on it. what they cannot sell you is the data to feed the machine and the discipline to size the bet. that is the part that actually compounds, and no course can put it in a formula.
1:00:58

David MacKay, Cambridge professor: "Citadel and Jane Street pay $900K for people who get one idea I taught free at Cambridge: information is measurable, and whoever measures it best wins. the casino knew it first. the machines know it now." this free lecture holds the entire "secret alpha" the funds and the AI gurus sell, and the man teaching it put his whole course and his whole book online for free and never locked a single page. at the board it's simple. information is just how much a signal cuts your uncertainty, and you can measure it in exact bits. the more an edge shrinks what you don't know, the more it is worth, and Shannon proved there is a hard ceiling on how fast you can compound it into money. that is the whole "edge", and the whole "AI magic", minus the marketing. MacKay taught it at Cambridge and gave the book away free in 2003. it has been free ever since. same point as the casino piece above: the house wins with a small, measurable edge, repeated and sized right, not with a secret. the theory is free and every fund and every model already runs on it. what they cannot sell you is the data to feed the machine and the discipline to size the bet. that is the part that actually compounds, and no course can put it in a formula.

Rossst.03

24,939 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

Richard Feynman, Nobel Prize-winning physicist: "You can know the name of every pattern in the market and understand nothing about why a single one works. I won a Nobel on that one distinction. it is the whole difference between an edge and a story you tell yourself." this free film is a Nobel laureate teaching you how to actually think, recorded by the BBC and free ever since. at the board it's simple. Feynman's obsession was the gap between naming a thing and understanding it. You can memorize the word for why a stock moved, "momentum", "mean reversion", and still know nothing about whether it will happen again. Real understanding means you can say why, from the mechanism up, and name what would break it. Everything else is a label pasted over ignorance. That's the whole "edge", minus the marketing. Feynman's rule was that the first principle is you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool. Same point as my casino piece above: the market is a machine for handing you convincing stories, and the only defense is refusing to believe one you cannot explain. the film is free and anyone can watch it tonight. what nobody can give you is the discipline to admit "I named it but I don't understand it" before you put money on it. That honesty is the edge, and it is the rarest thing there is.
1:06:19

Richard Feynman, Nobel Prize-winning physicist: "You can know the name of every pattern in the market and understand nothing about why a single one works. I won a Nobel on that one distinction. it is the whole difference between an edge and a story you tell yourself." this free film is a Nobel laureate teaching you how to actually think, recorded by the BBC and free ever since. at the board it's simple. Feynman's obsession was the gap between naming a thing and understanding it. You can memorize the word for why a stock moved, "momentum", "mean reversion", and still know nothing about whether it will happen again. Real understanding means you can say why, from the mechanism up, and name what would break it. Everything else is a label pasted over ignorance. That's the whole "edge", minus the marketing. Feynman's rule was that the first principle is you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool. Same point as my casino piece above: the market is a machine for handing you convincing stories, and the only defense is refusing to believe one you cannot explain. the film is free and anyone can watch it tonight. what nobody can give you is the discipline to admit "I named it but I don't understand it" before you put money on it. That honesty is the edge, and it is the rarest thing there is.

Rossst.03

20,025 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

ART IS ART Art does not ask what tool you used. It asks if you made something worth looking at. That is the whole argument. The rest is noise. AI artists are not a glitch in the timeline. They are here. They ship. They stay up late. They build worlds, characters, mornings, and tiny impossible things that did not exist yesterday. Some people will keep calling it theft. Some will keep calling it slop. Fine. Let them talk. We will keep posting. If a piece moves you, that is art. If a community shows up under it and makes more, that is a scene. If someone found a way to tell their story after years of being locked out of the old gate, that is not a crime. That is the point. Support the work. Quote the piece you love. Leave the artist a real comment, not a lecture. The future is not waiting for permission. It is already on the timeline. We grow it together.
0:51

ART IS ART Art does not ask what tool you used. It asks if you made something worth looking at. That is the whole argument. The rest is noise. AI artists are not a glitch in the timeline. They are here. They ship. They stay up late. They build worlds, characters, mornings, and tiny impossible things that did not exist yesterday. Some people will keep calling it theft. Some will keep calling it slop. Fine. Let them talk. We will keep posting. If a piece moves you, that is art. If a community shows up under it and makes more, that is a scene. If someone found a way to tell their story after years of being locked out of the old gate, that is not a crime. That is the point. Support the work. Quote the piece you love. Leave the artist a real comment, not a lecture. The future is not waiting for permission. It is already on the timeline. We grow it together.

Toshi

16,957 görüntüleme • 6 gün önce

Sukhendu Das, IIT Madras professor: "Jump Trading pays a 23 year old $500,000 a year for one skill: given the odds, pick the one move that makes the most money on average. that rule is the first thing this professor proves on a free chalkboard, and it costs nothing" this free lecture is the decision rule sitting under every trading bot and every hedge fund model on the planet. strip away the AI and the neural nets and one question is left. given everything you know right now, what is the single best bet. there is a mathematically correct answer. it is called the Bayes decision rule, and it turns a probability into the one action that maximizes your payoff. every profitable bot is just this rule running fast. Das builds it from zero, on a blackboard, in notation a beginner can follow. the odds go in, the optimal bet comes out. Wall Street rents this out as a $500,000 edge. an IIT professor hands you the rule itself for nothing.
37:34

Sukhendu Das, IIT Madras professor: "Jump Trading pays a 23 year old $500,000 a year for one skill: given the odds, pick the one move that makes the most money on average. that rule is the first thing this professor proves on a free chalkboard, and it costs nothing" this free lecture is the decision rule sitting under every trading bot and every hedge fund model on the planet. strip away the AI and the neural nets and one question is left. given everything you know right now, what is the single best bet. there is a mathematically correct answer. it is called the Bayes decision rule, and it turns a probability into the one action that maximizes your payoff. every profitable bot is just this rule running fast. Das builds it from zero, on a blackboard, in notation a beginner can follow. the odds go in, the optimal bet comes out. Wall Street rents this out as a $500,000 edge. an IIT professor hands you the rule itself for nothing.

Rossst.03

69,755 görüntüleme • 17 gün önce

Marvin Minsky, MIT professor and father of AI: "The best trader on Wall Street is no longer human. I spent fifty years proving the mind is just a machine built from smaller machines, and once that's true, nothing stops a machine from being the house. it already is." this free lecture holds the entire "AI edge" the funds and the gurus sell, and the man teaching it founded the field itself and put his whole MIT course online for free. at the board it's simple. Minsky's idea is that there is no magic in thinking. a mind is a huge pile of small, mindless parts, each doing something simple, and intelligence is just what happens when enough of them work together. a trading machine is the same trick: thousands of simple rules stacked until an edge appears. that's the whole "AI", minus the mystery. Minsky taught this at MIT and published "The Society of Mind" in 1986. the course has been free ever since. same point as my casino piece above: the house wins with many small mindless advantages stacked, not with one born genius. the ideas are free and every AI lab and every fund already has them. what they cannot sell you is the data and the compute to actually build the machine. that is the real moat now, and no lecture can hand it to you.
1:56:06

Marvin Minsky, MIT professor and father of AI: "The best trader on Wall Street is no longer human. I spent fifty years proving the mind is just a machine built from smaller machines, and once that's true, nothing stops a machine from being the house. it already is." this free lecture holds the entire "AI edge" the funds and the gurus sell, and the man teaching it founded the field itself and put his whole MIT course online for free. at the board it's simple. Minsky's idea is that there is no magic in thinking. a mind is a huge pile of small, mindless parts, each doing something simple, and intelligence is just what happens when enough of them work together. a trading machine is the same trick: thousands of simple rules stacked until an edge appears. that's the whole "AI", minus the mystery. Minsky taught this at MIT and published "The Society of Mind" in 1986. the course has been free ever since. same point as my casino piece above: the house wins with many small mindless advantages stacked, not with one born genius. the ideas are free and every AI lab and every fund already has them. what they cannot sell you is the data and the compute to actually build the machine. that is the real moat now, and no lecture can hand it to you.

Voltex

27,976 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce