[alva]

You are strongly defending him.

What proof do you have of his claims?

If this turns out to be a dodgy submission for self promotion it is mildly embarrassing for IndieHackers if they admit error in this instance.

If it turns out you have seen no solid proof for these claims and amidst the heavy skepticism express by multiple people in this thread you do not investigate and demand proof, than that calls into question the rest of IndieHackers

[csallen]

You are consistently ignoring the logic and reasoning I provide in my responses, and I'm not sure why.

[alva]

This is simple.

What proof do you have of his claims?

[csallen]

I sincerely don't understand what you want. You claimed it was impossible for him to find an exchange, and then he revealed his exchange. You claimed it was impossible for him to find data sources, but then he revealed his data sources. You claim that his system can't possibly be as good as it appears, but even Sebastian admits that he had to manually intervene and has also gotten lucky.

What extraordinary claim is being made that requires proof?

[alva]

> You claimed it was impossible for him to find an exchange, and then he revealed his exchange

Wrong.

"1. How did someone outside the financial world get access to an exchange that would allow this" "First bit of proof I think you should get. 1. Agreement with exchange" "1. I was not even referring to "top" exchanges. even just a single exchange. ask him which one he uses"

>You claimed it was impossible for him to find data sources,

Wrong.

"2. He states that he trained the model on financial data. This data is Extremely expensive. If he is using public data like Yahoo Finance, the level of detail that is provided is so low that it is incredibly unlikely any automated strategy could work off it" "[provide] 3. Data sources for AI training" "2. It is very unlikely a succesfull strategy could be based on this [public data]

> What extraordinary claim is being made that requires proof?

The claim that someone with 5 months of financial self learning has created an AI strategy that makes a profit 95% of the time. That is an extraordinary claim.

I have asked him elsewhere in the thread and still have not had a response.

Post historical and current positions, open and closed.

[csallen]

> It is very unlikely a successful strategy could be based on this [public data]... The claim that someone with 5 months of financial self learning has created an AI strategy that makes a profit 95% of the time.

I've responded to this many times now, and you've ignored me, which is why I don't believe you actually want an answer, so this will be the last time I respond:

Sebastian has not claimed that his strategy will work 95% of the time. That would be crazy. He hasn't even claimed that it has worked 95% of the time –- he specifically stated that if he hadn't manually intervened, it would have lost all his money.

He merely reported that over a limited window of time (5 months) with a limited number of trades (non-HFT) in a bull market, 95% of those trades were profitable. If you break down the math correctly (which you did incorrectly in our Twitter convo), winning 19 out of 20 coin tosses = 1 in 52k. That has surely been done many millions of times, assuming hundreds of millions of trades are made daily.

I'm sorry, but the extreme claim that you're looking for proof of was never made. You are battling a strawman.