• dragontamer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    ANNs form the basis of LLMs dude.

    In any case, you’re spitballing. Its all theoretical talk without any actual algorithm of note. You’re not talking about how Wall Street is organized or what HFTs are doing, which was the point of the post at the root of this discussion.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Also, I love that you keep telling me I’m spitballing as if I was claiming I wasn’t and I didn’t say in my very first post that it likely hasn’t happened yet.

      • dragontamer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Its about Support Vector Machines (a statistical method) and ANNs (of which ChatGPT is one type of).

        Did you read the link? Or did you just pick up the first hit from Google when you noticed this discussion wasn’t going the way you hoped? It doesn’t seem to have anything to do to counter my discussion point from earlier.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Please explain why that proves that it is impossible to use any machine learning method to make stock predictions better than a human.

          • dragontamer@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            You literally started this thread with:

            More proof that the stock market is based on people believing in magic.

            And you’re here arguing with me that magic tech that doesn’t exist might exist in the future. I’m trying to tie this discussion back down to reality by roughly describing how HFT work and you suddenly go all hypothetical on me. If you want blind faith in future tech, then sure whatever. Go believe away. But there’s some pretty basic contradictions in your argument style that’s quite amusing to me.