/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>49375470
Huh. Apparently a simple "Start with 1000 random choices, then greedy" is even better:
>N: 1 Avg score: 4761.53
>N: 10 Avg score: 5113.041
>N: 100 Avg score: 5348.414
>N: 200 Avg score: 5384.914
>N: 500 Avg score: 5433.634
>N: 1000 Avg score: 5434.111
>N: 2000 Avg score: 5396.651

>xymaLDgK

>>49375651
I tried, and it gives the same results if the first two machines are the 55% and 50%.
The code is not incorrect. Your math is.

>>30427215
>>30427257
>>30427332
What are the chances that the wrong machine gives the best results during the test spins?
Why that many test spins? Can it be lower (i.e. the test phase less costly?)

What is the next commodity play? Oil looks way overinflated. Copper and steel too.
I don't want to go into REEs, because I hate the "Big stock" meme.

This is like a cult. The worst thing is that cult tend to become more fanatic, because the more moderate members leave.
There's never been an apocalyptic cult that disappeared just because the apocalypse didn't happen when predicted; you lose a few followers, but the same gullibility that made most cult members members makes it easy for them to swallow excuses for why the apocalypse didn't happen. Broadly speaking it breaks down to two options: the timing of the prediction is a little off, or the Apocalypse actually *did* happen, people aren't attuned enough to the esoteric truth to see. We're seeing *both* flavors of rationalization in GME believers: the squeeze is yet to come, two weeks from now and the squeeze happened and hedgies are already in trouble.

Is this a good date to put 50% of my portfolio into one of the ARK funds, or they are already overbought and I should stay with QQQ?