Got questions about working in prop?

[rawrschach]

You can see it both ways...

although, imo, it's an optical illusion and has nothing to do with personality

 

[Technically Fundamental]

I can switch it by reading the text above and then below

 

[oiltanker]

looks to me its on some kind of timer pattern 15 sec, 45 secs, 5 secs etc. can't be bothered to work out the sequence or to see if its random. a quick look at the code would show it.

 

[Calinor]

The optical illusion can be seen both ways, and you can even get control of it and make it spin one way or the other

There really isn't any conclusive evidence whatsoever that ones past education, interviews or assessment centers provide any sort of predictive value-added as to later actual performance.

Actually there is evidence, whether it is conclusive is a matter of personal opinion. There have been some tests that look at past academic performance to the future performance, and compared it with interviewers opinions. The interviewers opinions were found to be effectively useless in predicting how the candidate would do, (HR won't want this information out, because it throws their assessment centres in the bin where they belong), people think they "can pick 'em", but in reality they usually can't. But past academic performance was statistically significant as a predictor of future performance. And of course that makes sense. Someone who can learn one set of things faster or to a higher standard than his peers, is more likely to be able to learn another set of skills faster or to a higher degree than his peers. It isn't rocket science. The only problem with that is that you sometimes have exceptionally smart people who for one reason or another underachieve in education.

Math skills have nothing to do with trading success - I practically have mathematical dyslexia - so why limit yourself to applicants that have number crunching skills that also go hand in hand with a dominant left brain and detail fixation, that might make them good execution traders, but hardly outstanding traders in charge of their own book.

I think you're right here though. I don't think numerical ability will help much. But if you consider the skills of someone who is good at mathematics, they will often be able to spot patterns in things. This is one of the primary skills in mathematics. So if you can spot patterns, and your mind works in a logical way, then that might help you trading.

arabianights, the candidate should probably want to know how you make your money. I remember from before that you make your money from the spread, and also news. Scalping the spread for instance would not be what most graduates have thought of as trading. Spreads trading, or market making would also not fit into the stereotype. Most young people - before they do it - would think of trading as buying stock and holding for a while and then selling for some profits. Also as a candidate I would want to know who will be training me, is it just one person and how successful have they been (nothing worse than being taught bad habits)? Training is the most important thing.

 

[arabianights]

the woman is turning clockwise how could anyone see that as anti clockwise?

totally agree, very confused

 

[Calinor]

lol, get control of your minds people. You can choose which way she spins.

 

[arabianights]

Alright, the best way to get it to go anti clockwise is to cover all of it up apart from the legs, then once they start going anti clockwise reveal the full image. Even then it reverts eventually.

Maybe all this tests is whether you're a tits or leg man?

 

[Technically Fundamental]

The leg that is raised switches when she turns to about 90 degrees when the gap between her legs disappears. Her ass is tricking you. I can't even make it do a full rotation anymore.

 

[BSD]

Calinor, don't get me wrong, I'm the last to debunk a good education, I have a Masters degree myself.

I'm just saying that what I have found to be the case a lot amongst people I knew through school and Uni also has quite a bit of statistic foundation, good grades etc do not correlate into degree of subsequent work life success.

Eg look here:

"Yet a recent review of the literature on this subject shows that the relationship between course grades and occupational success is in fact very low, often approaching zero."

The academic revolution - Google Bücher

I remember when I was studying there was a Harvard study out at the time that had CEO's and political leaders at the focus of their correlation study between their focus groups grades and later success that came to the same conclusion.

Going to Uni shows that you have commitment and can pull something through to the end without prematurely giving up, and that you're probably not one of the dimmer light bulbs in a room, but using it as a filter like that is about as far as that will carry you.

Btw, re the girl, I've only ever seen her clockwise, I just can't wire my brain round the other way.

Remember having heard that often the second born - me - is wired more into a right brain kinda person, while the first born is more of a left brainer.

Between my brother and me that's certainly true generally, and also specifically regarding subjects we took, he did computer sciences, I did political sciences just cause that interested me and I figured that's the best way to go about choosing, do what you like and the rest will fall in line.

 

[jaygo]

Whats the average and also the minimum age that recruiters are looking for?

 

[Calinor]

Yeah BSD, there are no guarantees

The correlation is very low, but it should still be positive and that on its own makes it relevant. If correlation was negative then our education system is doing something very wrong.

I went all the way to PhD, and I can safely say that when I started trading, I lost, and lost stupidly. Someone who dropped out of school at age 12 would probably not have traded worse than I did . The PhD itself doesn't help me in trading, it doesn't help me speak a foreign language, it doesn't make me more intelligent than anyone here on the board. But, the PhD taught me something very useful, which I now consider priceless. It taught me how to learn. Such a simple thing, but most people don't know.

I agree with you about maths not giving you an advantage in actual trading, and I would probably agree any related degree like economics or finance would also not help much. I think it is the side skills you pick up doing those courses though that are what is important. Attention to detail, research, statistics, concentration, ability to learn quickly and be tested on it and not crack under the pressure of exams.

If you take a first class degree from Cambridge in a technical subject, you can be pretty confident that guy can learn quickly, communicate clearly, works reasonably hard and can handle at least the exam pressure. Someone who quit school at 16 can make a great trader, but I'd think the Cambridge guy is favourite. Unfortunately I didn't go to Cambridge

 

[robster970]

But, the PhD taught me something very useful, which I now consider priceless. It taught me how to learn. Such a simple thing, but most people don't know.

I think this is especially pertinent with learning to trade because you are pretty much on your own. If you don't know how to educate yourself, nomatter how you choose to do it, you are pretty much stuffed. I think most people fail at things these days because they expect teacher to hand stuff on a plate to them and teacher just ain't there in the big bad world. Also failing/getting it wrong has really negative connotations and it's a crucial part of learning. In fact it's probably the most important element of learning.

 

[BSD]

the PhD taught me something very useful, which I now consider priceless. It taught me how to learn. Such a simple thing, but most people don't know.

Totally agree with that.

That, and that's a part of it, being able to, umm, as we had a thread here, seperate the wheat from the chaffhttp://www.trade2win.com/boards/general-trading-chat/29373-chaff-futures.html, hehe, the noise from what's success relevant, is what it's really all about.

Knowing how to learn, and, above all, how to spend your limited time on identifying and then learning the relevant things.

Too many just don't have a compass for what counts at all, and go on to overcomplicate the simplest affairs, go on an endless journey of never-ending fact finding and discovery that never leads them anywhere apart from round-and-round-and-round in one big merry circle.

 

[megamuel]

Thats quite cool, I can make it spin boths but it promarily spins clock wise for me. I wonder is left siders or right siders make better traders? Or maybe its only dark siders?

 

[PualoP]

looks to me its on some kind of timer pattern 15 sec, 45 secs, 5 secs etc. can't be bothered to work out the sequence or to see if its random. a quick look at the code would show it.

Ha ha, I bet you believe in Elliot Wave and Gann analysis too :cheesy:

 

[Technically Fundamental]

It doesn't spin... How could an image spin both ways. C'est ridicule!

 

[megamuel]

Depending on which way you see it she's either spinning as if she has an axis from her left shoulder to left foot or right shoulder to right foot.

 

[Technically Fundamental]

It doesn't spin. It turns to face 90 degrees to our left degrees then the left leg goes down and the right leg comes up but the silhouette remains the same. It then turns to the right and does the same again but switches to left leg up and turning left. It is looped. It's all in the silhouette - specifically the profile/line of the back.

 

[GammaJammer]

I saw both. Then she did the can-can. Then she made a gesture at me that I wouldn't normally think nice young ladies would know. You live and learn eh...

 

[Technically Fundamental]

Where have you been? When do I start work?