正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

JPMorgan AI Research Report: "Algorithmic decision-making removes the two largest sources of retail trading losses, emotional bias and inconsistent execution" This trader just spent 65 seconds explaining why Claude AI is a better trader than most humans His argument is simple: - AI doesn't revenge-trade after a loss -...

10,741 次观看 • 28 天前 •via X (Twitter)

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

what happens to trading if AI keeps getting better? Dwarkesh Patel asked Jane Street's head of technology the obvious question: if we get AGI, can't it just replace what you do? his answer: "trading feels to me like AGI-complete." "all of the different problems of the world end up influencing what you're doing in a trading context. trading involves figuring out what things are worth. which means making predictions about the future. and lots of different things flow into that." in other words, to fully automate trading you'd need to fully automate understanding the entire world. every geopolitical event, every supply chain shift, every behavioral pattern, every regulatory change, it all feeds into price. and even at a firm running tens of thousands of GPUs with sub-100-nanosecond execution: "many of your most profitable days happen when weird stuff happens and nobody knows what's going on. doing that well involves human judgment. we think humans work better than models through phase transitions." his conclusion: "i have never been more desperate to hire more engineers and traders than i am today. everything people are doing is more valuable than it was." so what does this mean for the rest of us? if the most automated trading firm on earth is saying humans matter more not less. the implication is that AI doesn't shrink the opportunity in trading. it raises the bar for what each person can do. the traders who learn to use these tools will pull further ahead. the ones who don't will fall further behind.

Goshawk Trades

57,195 次观看 • 1 个月前

At the BNB Chain hackathon, CZ 🔶 BNB made several very important points about AI trading (Everything in parentheses is my own view and judgment.) He first said that AI will be involved in trading everywhere. Trading itself is already a huge market: there are 300 million users on Binance alone, and if you add the decentralized ecosystems, that number is not small either. In such a mass-market environment, many different trading strategies can work, with countless different coins, different projects, and different ways to play. But there is a big problem here: building commercial AI trading platforms for retail users is actually very hard. If a trading strategy works very well for one person, once a billion people start using the same strategy, that strategy “might still work, or might stop working.” Take copy trading / follow trading as an example: if you buy first and everyone follows you, the first buyer will perform very well, but the last person to follow may not end up with good results. So, with the exact same strategy and the exact same copy logic, the outcomes can be completely different for different people. (On top of that, every strategy also has its own capital capacity limits.) Teams that can really build strong AI are, with high probability, going to trade with their own money. In today’s world, money itself is already somewhat like a “commodity”; many people have a lot of capital, and it’s actually not that hard to raise funds. If you truly have an algorithm that can make a lot of money, it’s not hard to get money and run your own book. There is really only one situation where you would sell this algorithm to mass-market users: for example, if you charge a $10 monthly subscription and can sell it to one million users, then your $10 million monthly subscription revenue is higher than the profit you could make by trading the strategy yourself. (Here this touches one of our earlier theses: as training AI models becomes relatively easier and the supply of models increases, model companies have more incentive to open-source. By analogy, as the production process of trading strategies is increasingly simplified by AI and the supply of strategies explodes, traders will have stronger incentives to monetize by expanding their influence in other words, by “open-sourcing” their strategies.) Of course, CZ did not say that this model can never work. Another path is to build an AI trading platform that lets users tune different AI algorithms, or very easily assemble their own structures and strategies, so that what each person ends up running is different and better tailored to themselves. Some people will make money, some people will lose money, but the platform still has value because it’s very hard for most people to build an AI trading algorithm from scratch. So there are a lot of trade-offs here; it’s not as simple as saying “once AI shows up, everything automatically gets better.” (This is exactly what we presented at the hackathon: you describe your own strategy in natural language, and the AI automatically generates a workflow. The parameters in that workflow, the models used, the logical structure, the APIs it calls, and even the algorithms it invokes are all customizable. The reasons we think workflows are a good way to do this include: controllable execution paths, Lego-like modular nodes, and better visualization that makes it easier for users to build and adjust their workflows.) Finally, his conclusion was very clear: it’s not that AI will definitely make trading better, and it’s not that AI will definitely make things worse. Rather, no matter what, in the future a huge number of people will use AI to trade. This will be a very large field, and whoever can build the best algorithms will make a lot of money.

Tykoo

25,535 次观看 • 7 个月前