Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[adam.sandler]

I think it is highly possible that the closer they get to the answer the more exponential the problems become, similar to reaching the speed of light.

Something that always keeps coming back to me is the phrase "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch".

Exactly. And it's not just a smart-sounding phrase—it was proven mathematically in 1995 by Wolpert & Macready. I remember referring to their paper when I was doing research back in the late 90s.

[Santa Fe Institute] William Macready, David Wolpert — No Free Lunch Theorems for Search

The full paper in PDF format can be found in the above link.

Hello. I want to give you a simple and concise summary of the article "No Free Lunch Theorems for Search".

If you need to find your key in a cluttered room your starting point depends on where the key most likely rests. No method is always the best.

The article also says that in the world of algorithms, if we examine all problems, no algorithm is better than the others in general. That is, Algorithm A is better in some problems and Algorithm B is better in others. There is no shortcut that always works; each algorithm must be suitable for its own problem.

Each problem requires its unique solution because no algorithm can be the optimal solution across all domains.

In short, there is no "free lunch" here.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[vapourminer]

Something that always keeps coming back to me is the phrase "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch".

Exactly. And it's not just a smart-sounding phrase—it was proven mathematically in 1995 by Wolpert & Macready. I remember referring to their paper when I was doing research back in the late 90s.

[Santa Fe Institute] William Macready, David Wolpert — No Free Lunch Theorems for Search

The full paper in PDF format can be found in the above link.

i was introduced to that phrase as TANSTAAFL in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Robert Heinlein.

awesome read if you havent yet.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[d_eddie]

I think it is highly possible that the closer they get to the answer the more exponential the problems become, similar to reaching the speed of light.

Something that always keeps coming back to me is the phrase "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch".

Exactly. And it's not just a smart-sounding phrase—it was proven mathematically in 1995 by Wolpert & Macready. I remember referring to their paper when I was doing research back in the late 90s.

[Santa Fe Institute] William Macready, David Wolpert — No Free Lunch Theorems for Search

The full paper in PDF format can be found in the above link.

Hello. I want to give you a simple and concise summary of the article "No Free Lunch Theorems for Search".

If you need to find your key in a cluttered room your starting point depends on where the key most likely rests. No method is always the best.

The article also says that in the world of algorithms, if we examine all problems, no algorithm is better than the others in general. That is, Algorithm A is better in some problems and Algorithm B is better in others. There is no shortcut that always works; each algorithm must be suitable for its own problem.

Each problem requires its unique solution because no algorithm can be the optimal solution across all domains.

In short, there is no "free lunch" here.

Actually, the paper refers to search for maximum or minimum values of an objective function (cost or prize) of the key values f(x[j]), not to search among the keys x[j] themselves. It says that if you average over all functions, no algorithm is better than any other. This is unsurprising, since the objective function can have any general form - in particular, it can be nonlinear, which invalidates the simplest approach: first sort the keys, then the max or min is either at the beginning or at the end. Averaging over ALL possible real functions is not trivial, since it's an uncountable infinity. The proof uses some clever reasoning to avoid actually expressing the average.

On the other hand, if we search among the key values themselves, the simple sort-and-pick-first-or-last algorithm can be used and it IS better than all the others. If the keys are integers, say, we can use a radix sort, which requires a time proportional to the number n of keys. Then we instantly pick either the first or the last. Total: O(n).

If the keys are already sorted, of course, picking first or last is immediate, no matter how many there are. That's O(1). If the keys can't be sorted lexicographically (e.g., real, complex, or aggregated data types), or if you're searching among values of the objective function f(x[j]), then radix sort is no good and you first spend O(n log n) to sort, then you pick first-or-last. So, there can be free lunches if you don't have to evaluate objective functions after all.

[Krubster]

My LN node has been very active today, no idea why. I usually see these movements when the price is fluctuating heavily, that's not the case today though.

I had my 2nd biggest forward ever happening today as well. Here's the notification from my telegram bot

💰 Forwarded 0.41071514 bfx-lnd0 → LOOP.

110k sats in profit today. I wish I could keep that pace. Normally, my monthly profits varies between 200 to 300k sats.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[philipma1957]

My LN node has been very active today, no idea why. I usually see these movements when the price is fluctuating heavily, that's not the case today though.

I had my 2nd biggest forward ever happening today as well. Here's the notification from my telegram bot

💰 Forwarded 0.41071514 bfx-lnd0 → LOOP.

110k sats in profit today. I wish I could keep that pace. Normally, my monthly profits varies between 200 to 300k sats.

well 3300k sats vs 300k is a nice goal.

for a months earnings.

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[sirazimuth]

I think it is highly possible that the closer they get to the answer the more exponential the problems become, similar to reaching the speed of light.

Something that always keeps coming back to me is the phrase "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch".

Exactly. And it's not just a smart-sounding phrase—it was proven mathematically in 1995 by Wolpert & Macready. I remember referring to their paper when I was doing research back in the late 90s.

[Santa Fe Institute] William Macready, David Wolpert — No Free Lunch Theorems for Search

The full paper in PDF format can be found in the above link.

Hello. I want to give you a simple and concise summary of the article "No Free Lunch Theorems for Search".
<snipped out for brevity about free lunches......>

In short, there is no "free lunch" here.

Actually, the paper refers to <snipped out words way above my head...> So, there can be free lunches if you don't have to evaluate objective functions after all.

Well, I had lunch at the bar last week with my work buddy and he kindly covered the tab, including my Gin and Tonic with a twist...so there is that.

[Biodom]

I think it is highly possible that the closer they get to the answer the more exponential the problems become, similar to reaching the speed of light.

Something that always keeps coming back to me is the phrase "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch".

Exactly. And it's not just a smart-sounding phrase—it was proven mathematically in 1995 by Wolpert & Macready. I remember referring to their paper when I was doing research back in the late 90s.

[Santa Fe Institute] William Macready, David Wolpert — No Free Lunch Theorems for Search

The full paper in PDF format can be found in the above link.

Hello. I want to give you a simple and concise summary of the article "No Free Lunch Theorems for Search".
<snipped out for brevity about free lunches......>

In short, there is no "free lunch" here.

Actually, the paper refers to <snipped out words way above my head...> So, there can be free lunches if you don't have to evaluate objective functions after all.

Well, I had lunch at the bar last week with my work buddy and he kindly covered the tab, including my Gin and Tonic with a twist...so there is that.

The whole 'thing' of existence of anything is a free lunch...so far.
A game of infinitesimally small chances, apparently.
I read a couple of books about it..made me wonder about the whole "game".

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com

[Bijonjata]

Code:

bitcointalk.org
Host
Error

 

occasionally

Does it be understood in advance?

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation
Chartbuddy thanks talkimg.com