The level needed to be a legend on ET is not high. If you are good in impressing people by telling things nobody understand and combine that with a very confident and arrogant attitude, you will be a legend on ET. A bit the Trump style.
NOTE: this is not directed at any one person. This is not a personal attack. Reference to "you" is merely for flow of thought. On the contrary. The arrogance embodied in your statement, that all there is, is what you understand, is what stifles comprehension and flexibility. Rather than saying you do not process the knowledge, data, or other inputs to decipher a situation, you immediately call the situation random. A lack of understanding, or lack of acknowledgment that input may be missing, unknown, or unrecognizable does not mean a situation is random. It merely means comprehension of the situation is incomplete. When a butterfly flaps it's wings, a tsunami occurs somewhere. In context, the term tsunami may not refer to a wave of water. There is nothing wrong with not understanding a situation and recognizing and understanding the not understanding. I do it every day. And it's how I continue growing and learning. Carry On!
Yep, psychological studies show that you just need to use the right (sophisticated) vocabulary to convince people that you are a genius, no matter how absurd and insane your ideas are. That's how some "traders" on ET (and elsewhere) can get away with total gibberish, as long as they rant in a charismatic way.
We need more of these 'legends'. It's akin to throwing a stick around for a dog, entertaining, huge waste of time, nothing achieved but keeps the dog from being bored and stirring trouble.
Just wanted to clarify that even if the market is 100% non-random; that doesn't imply that we know all the factors with which to predict it with 100 percent accuracy; which leads to my next post ...
No. But, you should have defined 'random.' Suppose there is a sequence of random numbers: 2342523 Now suppose a new sequence is created, using the first sequence and addition random numbers: 2342523616234252398498523425236581652342523965152342523 So, is this new sequence random? Yes, but in contains non-random components. You'd have to define 'truly random.' You'd have to consider the distribution and use appropriate money management (risk/reward, etc.). Similar to counting cards in a one deck Blackjack card game. Most people only consider the answer to be 'either this, or that.' It's actually both, imo. EDIT: I should clarify: I don't think anything, in the physical world, above the quantum level is truly random. I'm not sure about whether true randomness exists at the quantum level. I'm also not sure if minds are capable of making random decisions. Simply not being able to consistently predict something doesn't necessarily mean "it must be random."