Topic: Prediction: Breaking $500 within 24 hours - page 6. (Read 13228 times)

Random numbers; what kind of ill concept is this?

A universe without god needs randomness. Finding what causes randomness could be impossible, but that doesn't make it any less true. Things like radioactive decay appear to happen for no reason. Things appear random on a quantum level, while on a larger scale they don't appear random at all. It may be just a truth we have to accept unless something else comes along.

There are several things wrong with this data you are providing.

First of all, I'm not sure how you chose the specific times you tested, but they are clearly it's worst predictions. As you said, you only took a sample of 6 predictions. Every hour I take a sample of something like 60,000 predictions and calculate the average error. It comes to about 1.3%, so actually that is the correct figure (not 6%). Furthermore, this means that if the average deviation during 24 hours is 3.8%, then these predictions perform WAY better than just guessing the same price.

Second, it sounds like you are comparing predictions to the price at that moment. The prices predicted are not the price at that specific hour - they are the average price over the course of that hour. I do state this a few times on the website, including in the main description of the charts on the home page.

Third of all, the average errors actually are an under-representation of its accuracy because it updates every hour. When it predicts an hourly price incorrectly, it readjusts predictions so that they will be more accurate.

And lastly, if I could tell you the future error of my predictions, they wouldn't really be predictions would they? They would be science fiction lol...

I don't know if this method adds any value. You read about an error of 1.3% on a daily basis. This is a flaw because this only counts for ex ante predictions. Not for acutal predictions into the future. For example he made the prediction of 480$. The real price was around 440$. This is an error of 8.3%.

I watched it for a while and checked:
30.march 3pm it predicted 489$. Real price (24h later) was: 455$ (7%error)
31.3. 12am he predicted 465$. Real price was: 486$ (4.3%)
1.4. 1am he predicted 456$. Real price was: 485$ (6.3%)
1.4. 8pm he predicted 466$. Real price was: 434$ (6.9%)
2.4. 11am he predicted 449$. Real price was: 422$ (6%)

So there is an average error of about 6%.

So is that good or bad? We can just estimate that quickly. Take the prediction: "Price today is the price in 24h". This is just the volatility. I took the hourly prices of bitstamp and compared it to the value 24h later. The mean error was 3.8%.

-> So if you just guess that the current price is the price in 24h you drive better than with this prediction of the neural network (although I just made a sample of 6 predictions of it).

Hmmm I think that the price will move faster than that. If it keeps crashing, I think it will be below $200 in one month. Otherwise, I think it will have spiked back up to at least like $500. I would be surprised to see a slow and steady fall like that.

Most probably:
350 within 1 week.
300 within 2 weeks.
250 within 3 weeks
200 within 1 month.

 

It doesn't always say that the price will go up, it has successfully predicted dips in price before.

But yes, it looks at the last 60 hours for the 24 hour prediction. However, it learns how to predict by looking at the entire price history on bitstamp, going about 3 years back. The model it uses is called an artificial neural network. You can read about them on Wikipedia or a bunch of other sites if you are interested.

$500 getting less and less probable...

Current price: $377.02 (14.35%)

Is the algorithm based on some sort of last couple of days moving average? It constantly says price will go up.

lol well I hope it goes up, but also I posted this a week ago haha

$500 within 24 hours from now is still possible.
BTC tends to bounce fast once the rally/recovery begins. 

Random as in unpredictable.   

Find me a theory that explains how a random activity works. For something to be random it has to happen for no reason, with nothing preceeding it. We cannot as humans beings necessarily predict the consequences of actions, but how can something happen without cause or reason?

Did I randomly come across this post and decide to start writing a response.... well if I was telling someone else about it I would probably say I came across the post randomly - however I didn't, all the events from my birth onwards led me to that point (and of course my mother and fathers actions would of also had an affect, and theirs and so on). So it wasn't random, several trillion variables which all had a set value due to other trillions of variables and so on created the unique event of me replying to this post.

But hey, its just theory of mine - I may be wrong .

:p

Yeah, I mean as I've said, I don't know a lot about trading. I'm doing this from a computer science perspective, so I don't know how profitable this will be. As I've said before though, I believe predictions should be taken with a grain of salt, and you should consider recent news as well when making decisions, and use your own judgement. I would never blindly trade according to these predictions only (which is what the simulator will be doing). However I believe it can be a good tool to consult when making decisions to buy/sell. It may be able to help you optimize when you decide to execute trades, allowing you to earn some extra money.

I hope you make a lot of money.   Im not here to criticize your system.   Im just skeptical as an options trader. Im a firm believer in random walk in short term (minutes) ,  technicals in semi  short (hours,  days)  term and fundamentals long term (days,  months) .   Most of my trades are delta neutral.  I sell premium 45 days out on IV spikes.   I do have spec long positions that are 6 mos to year out

2 problems I foresee trading BTC

1.  The slippage on BTC  is huge.   Probably  cause theres no liquidity.  I looked on bitstamp and coinbase and the bid/ask can be $5 wide.  Lack of liquidity also makes difficult for intraday trading if you cant get in and out of position

2.  Theres no easy way to short BTC so you can only trade bullish direction.   In options you can trade up,  down,  or sideways

Thank you, that's nice to hear


Are you talking about the trade simulator idea that I've been testing? The method I'm testing at the moment, which I think is the most promising, is that it looks at the 24 hour chart and sets a buy and sell price based on the predictions. If it doesn't predict for the price to significantly change, it just sets the buy price to 1.5% below the current price, and the sell price to 1.5% above. If the price is supposed to change soon, then it sets the buy or sell price to the price that the chart says it should reach (buy if it's low, sell if it's high obviously).

If it doesn't reach the target then it will just wait. I have it so that it only buys and sells 1 btc at a time, never more or less. I feel like this is the simplest way to show potential profitability. Then people can see how much money per bitcoin it makes by trading based on predictions.

Also remember that if the target says, for example, that the price will be $480 at 6:00 pm, that doesn't actually mean it will be the price at that time. It means that will be the average price over the course of the hour leading up to that time, meaning that it is likely that the price will go a bit higher and a bit lower. If I set the sell to $480, that might not be the highest price it gets to but it will most likely reach that price. Even if the average price over the course of that hour ends up being $475 or $470, there is still a solid chance it will hit $480 at some point.

Unfortunately, the price has been super stable the past day or so, so the simulator isn't buying or selling. Hopefully we'll get a bit of volatility soon and we can see how it actually does.

Just curious how do you trade these predictions?  You just buy and sell if your target is hit?

If your target doesn't hit what do you do?  Double down? Swallow loss?

Even if you improve the preditions and add more functions into your website, there are always people arguing about it, instead of looking for solutions to improved it themself.
Most people who have seen your work are positive.

As someone who knows nothing about neural networks, I don't think you are in any place to say that my method of calculation is an inappropriate statistic (also that statement doesn't make sense in English).

As someone who knows much less about who does and doesn't understand what aspects of my website than I do, I don't think you are in any place to say that the vast majority of people don't understand the error at all (which is false).

As someone who knows very little, if anything, about pattern recognition and function approximation, I don't think you are in any place to say that the error calculated on data from 2 years ago is any less relevant than the error calculated on data from 2 days ago. They are equally relevant and the fact that you disagree with this just continues to confirm your lack of understanding of my method.

The only reasonable point you've made is that I could show the variance distribution. However, I address this on the about page in a very non-mathematical way. I tell people that the prices are less accurate when real-life events are affecting the price, and they are more accurate when prices are stable. Statistics are not needed to back this statement, as it is pretty intuitively obvious and it gives people enough information to make their own intelligent judgement without having to clutter the site with a bunch of statistics that are meaningless to almost everyone (except you and the 3 other mathematicians who are looking at my site).
 
There are people out there who are skeptical of my predictions and even skeptical of my error figures, and that is perfectly reasonable. However, it is ridiculous when people who have no understanding of what I do criticize my methods. I understand that you have some background in math, but you clearly don't understand how non-mathematicians (i.e. almost every person on Earth) look at things and understand data. You are the only person of 13,000 who has expressed any issue with my method of calculating this number. I could clutter the site with tons of detailed statistics and you might be able to have a thorough understanding of the error, but nobody else would.

My current average error is one number - simple. It describes all of the data at once, and it is not misleading because everyone knows the 1hr prediction is likely to be more accurate than the 24hr prediction.

You can continue to hate on my project for no reason if you want, but you have no point here, I'm sorry...

we will see soon if you were right, i personally doubt it