Ah yes, the web bot also predicted that the world would end in 2012... not that I wouldn't mind the price going to $1000 soon, I just don't buy into this modern day Nostradamus where you have a guy who claims his computer algorithm that is essentially a content scraper can somehow pick up on psychic energy and predict the future by simply making a bunch of very vague broad predictions, many which happen on a somewhat regular basis already so it's not that hard to predict.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
I agree with you that web bot can be all over the place and timing for events can be way off but It seems like the economic predictions have had some gems lately. For example, months ago the web bot predicted an italian banking crisis will quickly spread into the rest of Europe and collapse the banking system there. While this hasn't completely happened yet I have to give the Web bot kudos for getting the italian banking crisis right way before anyone else was talking about. That is the type of info I value from the web bot.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-26/italy-scrambles-arrange-%E2%82%AC5-billion-bailout-monte-paschi-fridays-stress-test
The thing is, you didn't need web bot to predict this, there were already people predicting and writing about these kinds of economic situations based on actual financial data like looking at the banks' balance sheets and other financial indicators rather than relying on some hokey 'psychic' word patterns, so I'm not really impressed when the webbot makes these types of predictions because it's just copying/scraping news articles of people who actually crunch the numbers.
So you don't see any value in collecting all these news stories and analyzing them for keywords and comparing that to old data?
Sure, there's certainly value in analyzing web data of news stories, in fact there are already lots of companies that do this type of thing, my main issue is how Cliff High is loosely interpreting this data to fit what seems to be his own gloom and doom narrative. I have not seen any of his research on how he goes about interpreting the data to get what is written in his reports, nor have we seen anyone peer review his code to determine the scientific merits of it. I'm very skeptical of his methods and would not be surprised if he is just re-writing what he reads in the various doom and gloom articles/forums on the Internet.