Topic: Martin Armstrong Discussion - page 111. (Read 647176 times)

Based on the energy spent ALONE, we know that his claim of $6 million spent on energy is bogus, and therefore, the entire claim is bogus.  The WHOLE Sequoia burns $6 to $7 million in energy cost, and Socrates takes almost 100% capacity of Sequoia?

IMPOSSIBLE!

If you show me another instance where the US government SELLS the spare capacity of their instruments to the public, post it.  Otherwise, Martin Armstrong has LIED about his software codes.

you actually don't have any evidence based on the numbers given by the AI and the array's that prove his model is wrong so it is you who needs defend against these big claims that its a scam. None of you know how to even read an array which is a big problem, since timing is everything.

what Armstrong is saying I believe is correct he has said it multiple times throughout his career

 based on the posts of Ma_talk we don't have enough information to conclude that what Armstrong is saying is false,
"There is no way that government will let any commercial business to run anything on their super-computer simply due to security reasons"

This is MA_talks conclusion which cannot be verified and  simply shows he does not know for sure if they let him use it or not and really is a very weak argument and does not give any proof that Armstrong is in fact lying.


https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/products_services/socrates/comprehending-the-capabilities-of-ai/

@Gumbi what are your thoughts about MA's claims that his AI machine was using IBM Sequoia and that it cost him $100m to "build"?

This was discussed and linked to about 10 messages ago.

Does that claim alone not indicate MA might be making it all up? And if not, why lie so brazenly - what does he gain?

For you, we are going to build a pocket calculator with "AI" written on it. With that you can "play the numbers game". That pocket calculator will, for each calculation, put out multiple results to choose from. That will keep you happy for a while.


Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for that reason but he has not changed.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog.

Every single defrauded person should report their case, see Where and how to complain

you don't know that its a scam you only believe it to be/ so far there has been no real evidence to say that it is a scam the only game this AI playing is the numbers game and all you ever talk about is what Armstrong's opinion. Only mediocre minds will take your word that it doesn't work anyone will any real intelligence will test it themselves.

Yes exactly. A great start would be linking from this site; posting comments into as many MA YouTube videos as possible also linking to the site; plus links on Reddit and Quora threads where the latter three channels will have much more authority when creating backlinks.

Thanks.

I wonder how many know how to search with google any pages excluding at armstrongeconomics.com


Socrates armstrong scam -site:armstrongeconomics.com

With this search, bitcointalk is on top of the list.


So as a start, we would want to use this site to link to any new site, getting some fairly good traction.


Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for that reason but he has not changed.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog.

Every single defrauded person should report their case, see Where and how to complain

In terms of getting the word out - at least to create a more balanced conversation about MA - I do know enough about SEO to make some recommendations. The problem is, it takes time and effort to rank pages on Google p1 for core terms related to MA. Those terms are below, and i have included monthly search volumes in the US, CA and UK:

Target keyword	US	CA	UK
martin armstrong	14800	8100	2400
martin armstrong blog	3600	1900	590
armstrong economics	5400	2900	1000
armstrong economics blog	1900	720	210

It would be difficult to rank for these only because they have reasonably high search volume. We should also assume MA has a reputation management firm working for him, not least as he appears to love controlling the online conversation about him. Reputation management professionals know exactly how to bury negative links and it is interesting that search queries that are negative of MA sees multiple of his blog posts rank high on Google.

I wonder if he has been advised?...

Much lower volume terms are far easier to rank for and quickly. These include:
martin armstrong socrates
martin armstrong net worth
martin armstrong predictions
martin armstrong economics
martin armstrong cycles
martin armstrong investments
martin armstrong gold
martin armstrong bitcoin
armstrong economics bias
armstrong economics review
armstrong economics socrates
armstrong economics gold
armstrong economics computer models


The catch is these see very few searches each month, so impact is low.

This website (bitcointalk) COULD rank highly, were it not for the atrocious design from circa 2003 (sorry site owners). It is also not mobile optimised, so Google will penalise it in the rankings. Were this site HTML5 and built for mobile-first, it likely would be sitting at the top of the page for negative intent search queries for "martin armstrong", not least as there is a lot of content (almost 300 pages) and more posts/pages are added almost daily.

Recommendations to rank for even core terms would be:

Creating a website where the URL contains "martinarmstrong" e.g. martinarmstrongscam.com
While that won't do much on Google, it has a bigger impact on Bing search. And that is relevant because it is likely MAs audience is older/tech Luddites. Those people are less likely to change their default browser. Thus a higher proportion of Bing searchers are older people. Bing algo weights exact match URLs higher than Google so that can help with ranking. Otherwise it is just more relevant to a human whether searching on Google or Bing.

Ensuring any website has new content (pages) added at least once daily
This tells crawlers the site is "active" and algos also favour fresh content. With that, internal linking of previous articles and external links to other online resources are also solid quality signals when ranking pages organically.

Content creation on multiple properties
This means posting content to YouTube, all other major social media sites including Facebook and LinkedIn, Medium and other high quality publishing sites. Descriptions and other elements of this content should link to the MA website built to uncover his fabrications.

Backlinks on high quality publisher websites
This would mean working with a major publishing site e.g. Forbes or similar, or even better a major news website, and publishing a critical article linking back to above mentioned website.


There is a lot more to it, but the point is: it does require effort.

A more fractured way of achieving this - though not inferior in getting the message out - would be to just post critical content on major sites that will naturally rank high and ensure you include links to content that evidences your claims, which is good for humans (they can then form their own conclusion) and for machines (they like links and it is a quality signal when ranking on Google/Bing).

In fact, this might even be a superior way of getting the word out, where search volumes even on core terms are small outside of the US and CA. Most of MA's 1.5 million monthly traffic navigate from boomarks or are otherwise Direct traffic. The rest come from referrals on publisher sites. That might present a much better opportunity to engage with more of MA's followers. So posting on:

- LinkedIn
- Creating SlideShare PDFs
- Medium.com articles
- Posting comments on message boards that feature MA content and link to content
- Posting comments on YouTube videos that feature MA content (there is a lot) and link to content
- Posting comments to Reddit forums, Quora and other sites, or even creating more threads on those sites
- Registering as many social accounts as possible under the name "Martin Armstrong" where you can then post links to content
- Writing a free PDF and publish it to Amazon.com for Kindle

This isn't about trashing MA, it is just about unearthing some quite clear fabrications and may even force him to address these issues.

There are two things that further frustrate this:

First, for those that have followed MA for decades, it would be almost impossible to properly fact check his writing/forecasts before the internet found prevalence past 20 years. And even then, MA's writings online go back to around 2008, so there is only c.10 years of documented articles that can be scrutinised, fact checked and linked to. That is perhaps why he managed to vaporise $500m and only got caught because his brokerage bank had been sold - there was no real way to scrutinise his work. Otherwise the charade would have gone on well beyond 1999.

So there could be a considerable MA following that is totally oblivious to his charlatan ways, and the confirmation bias is going to be very strong in those people. Since his forecasts/lies were never questioned by his followers decades ago, they will be even less likely to do so today. It would be like that scene in The Matrix where Neo is unplugged and cannot believe what he thought was reality was invented. So there will be no appetite among those followers to unearth dirt on their economic "hero".


Second, if the WEC was anything to go by, his primary audience is now retired or nearing retirement. These are the techy Luddites who won't know how to use the internet unlike younger generations. So even though it IS now easier to fact check and scrutinise MA, these followers are unlikely to do so, and perhaps wouldn't know where to even begin unearthing MA's clever sham via online channels.


To the above point, to get a good idea of who his most devout fans are, take a look at the 2018 Orlando WEC:
https://d33wjekvz3zs1a.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/2018-Orlando-WEC-R.jpg

They are as I explained: average age is likely 50+, they are primarily white, male, and nearing or are retired.

So the people who CANNOT afford to lose money as their time to make money rapidly diminish are the ones who:
- Take MA's (made up) words as gospel, potentially missing out on trading opportunities or making bad trades based on (made up) Socrates calls
- Would never even think about fact checking MA
- Likely aren't very "techy" so might not know how to fact check online nor even understand what MA talks about e.g. "supercomputer" / "IBM Sequoia".

To the above point, this is also curious as I just remembered. Now I am no AI expert, but am indeed "techy". On stage at the 2018 Orlando WEC, MA explained his system made use of IF THEN ELSE statements, which is basic code. It is NOT AI. I thought it odd he was even talking about such a thing as he was basically admitting he does not have a real AI machine. Of course, his older non-techy audience would have no idea what he is talking about and that might even cement their opinions that he's a computer programming "genius".

Since MA fully controls the conversation about him online (which I must admit is very clever), he will continue getting away with it. Those that search for something find it. So save having someone flyering outside the Orlando WEC at the Hilton Bonnet Creek, the vast majority of his readership will continue handing MA their money and potentially losing more with trades based on - to quote The Matrix again - an invented reality. Their cult leader is never dared to be questioned and in their eyes, he (or his made up AI machine) is never wrong.

Some of the people I met at the Orlando WEC had attended multiple conferences and were planning on attending more. I even got speaking to FAMILY, with two brothers and their father, who had flown in from Canada. It was not their first WEC either. So there are likely many MA followers who have spent TENS of thousands of dollars attending WECs and paying for subs and reports.

If you really do have $2750 to burn and are intrigued by MA and want to find out who his readership are, then maybe you won't feel that cheated. But attending multiple times is overkill for the price tag, and especially if you are bringing family members along. There just isn't enough information to truly make money that otherwise could have been found for free on various investor websites.

And $2750 is also better spent investing rather than sitting around listening to more theory or fabrications.

MA_talk I have already exposed you as a complete fraud yourself since you stopped following Armstrong in 2015 and the ask-Socrates AI model was only launched in 2016, so essentially you have never traded on a single reversal or array. You simply have no authority to say whether this model works or not because you have zero experience even using it, the pro version only came out in 2019 and you have not even bothered to evaluate it which shows your bias.

Its shows a huge lack of intelligence to believe in someone for 15 years lol and never come to any kind of conclusion about his work that simply shows you were following him blindly without any understanding of your own regarding the model and now you have flipped to disbelieving him which is another mistake.

Bikefront has evaluated the service but probably only for 3 months or less which is not enough time to say with certainty that is doesn’t work and he is also in disbelief mode.

Any help on content or visibility (such as by linking back at other places) will be highly appreciated.  I used blogspot.com because I don't intent to put any ads to cover for any expenses (IF it can be positive ROI).  All the expenses will be just my time.

I am also open to any shared ownership structure, etc.  The whole thing is pro-bono, for public benefits.

I'm only doing that site, because I don't want this myth about Armstrong to continue.  I got duped for decades, and I want to help all others to see the facts as they are as well.  Martin Armstrong is running a one-sided show, and there is currently no websites that condense the opposite views.  Essentially, I'm doing something that I so wish that somebody has done 15+ years ago for me, without me losing out on so many opportunities, and doing the wrong trades, etc.

This is not a sure day that something will happen but we are now in a period of decline for the next few years and we must be even better.

I've been thinking the same thing. While this blog has been definitive in helping us to clearly layout how MA and Socrates is completely fake it isn't accessible with 250+ pages and the working conversations can be confusing with a lot of side noise.

MA_Talk has started a blog with some of the highlights but I wonder if there's a way we can elevate the visibility and add content so it's more than a one-man effort. I'm fortunate enough to have time while at grad school to contribute and would even be happy to cover the expense of a domain name.

I independently verified that Sequoia is built for US government and contracted to IBM.

https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/26599.wss


The information above is from ibm.com press release DIRECTLY.  And it stated that IBM was contracted to build this super-computer for Department of Energy.

So Armstrong LIED.  There is no way that government will let any commercial business to run anything on their super-computer simply due to security reasons, and in the same year that it is completed.  His post is dated before October 11, 2012, when WayBack Machine made the first sample of that page:
https://web.archive.org/web/20121011050835/https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/institutional-time-share/

One of my points has been that you catch someone lying, once, twice, and third time.  And then you think about WHY he would lie when he doesn't need to?  Well, I think the only logical conclusion is that the WHOLE THING about Socrates is a big LIE.

This is the similar the lie about he constructing the building for his office, when it's just a time-shared office arrangement.

It is LIE after LIE from Armstrong.

And then there is Gumbi, continue to make all kinds of claims, just like Armstrong, without any proof, but sensational numbers, or attempt to over-dominate by verbal tactics, but NO PROOF.  Talk is empty.

I am not sure whether there needs to be a dramatic outcome. I hope that in our information age, things get taken care of automatically as long as people are not asleep at the wheel. Honesty and integrity need to be defended, and this needs a systematic approach and some style. I am really encouraged by what has been uncovered in this blog.

But this alone is only the first step. The information in his blog needs to be put into a different format, away from this site where it can be quoted and not messed around with. There are many facts. This is not just opinion.

We need a level playing field. Obviously this blog is open to both sides, but Armstrong has the advantage of full censorship of his own site. We need a counterweight to that.

Otherwise, Martin Armstrong will become a legend for future generations of wishful thinkers to come. Like William Delbert Gann who never made any money trading, only by selling his courses.


Martin Armstrong is a charlatan, and he spent 11 years in jail for that reason but he has not changed.

Read this blog starting here to find out more about computerized fraud.


See armstrongecmscam.blogspot.com for a more compact view of major findings posted in this blog.

Every single defrauded person should report their case, see Where and how to complain

According to what MA said in the past you can trade the "1% rule" at month end.
So trading it back to the 1362.50 level.

Maybe a nice trade for @Gumbi? Hope he still takes on the challenge to show us live trades.

Martin Armstrong: "To have a computer write the analysis and you know there is no human bias involved one way or another".

Another piece of the puzzle fits together. MA knows the legal system.

If ever a class action lawsuit is started by all those retail investors who have made losing trades based on Socrates "predictions", or who feel their conference/subs outlay was a swindle based on fraudulent "forecasts", then he can sit in the court and argue he never gave any advice, it was ALL the computer.

MA then walks out of the court a free man, all he has to do is shut down Socrates and stop blogging about "it".

Cue a few photos of some crude looking server - that is Socrates - plus some screenshots of some arrays that look like they were built using MS DOS, and some automated computer-written report, and that will be that. All the evidence MA needs to "prove" it was all a machine and not him making it all up.

Clever.

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/markets-by-sector/precious-metals/gold/socrates-gold/



Ohhhhhh Marty you are so great... and I thought that all of his readers were still waiting for Gold to hit under $1000 The infallible Socrates system is beyond awesome!

"Objective analysis without the human bias."

Which is really funny, because Armstrong regularly writes as a sensationalist.

1362.50 is THE big monthly bullish according to MA. Electing that by Friday and we're off as he has been saying for 3 years.
It tested 1362,50 4x times on a monthly basis (July '17, August '17, January '18, April '18). So the 4 groups of 'false moves theory' again.

Well, there is a nice blog post from a random person that is praising Socrates and stating "See you in Orlando". The sales pitch has started for the next WEC. The posts states that they were amazed by the the move up in gold after resistance was broken. This person must be completely new to trading because that is what prices do when there is a technical break out. A super computer is not needed to tell you that, but rather one line on a chart connecting the highs. Oh my!