In cryptocurrency market analysis, you often see this phenomenon: analysts form a conclusion first, then adjust data and models in reverse to prove it. To put it bluntly, this is to make the data obedient. Truly professional data analysts should let the data speak, rather than forcing the data to perform. The reality is that, many times, models are either not flexible enough or analysts' subjective intentions are too strong. Such routines are common in market forecasting, trading signal generation, and on-chain data interpretation. If you haven't experienced the process of "repeated validation" of data (which is actually repeated adjustment), then you probably haven't truly been in this circle.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
17 Likes
Reward
17
5
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
GasFeeCrier
· 14h ago
Haha, this is the truth of the circle. I've seen data repeatedly "verify" it many times, and the conclusion is already set, tweaking parameters until nightfall.
View OriginalReply0
CryptoFortuneTeller
· 14h ago
I'm very familiar with this pattern of data being repeatedly adjusted. Just by looking at the analyst's report, I can tell whether they want the price to go up or down. Counter-trend trading is definitely the way to go.
View OriginalReply0
RugpullAlertOfficer
· 14h ago
This is the norm in the circle. In the end, data can lie, and analysts are even better at it.
View OriginalReply0
gas_fee_therapist
· 15h ago
This kind of data manipulation to fake results has long bored me. A bunch of independent media analysts jump to conclusions and then manipulate data, it's truly unbelievable.
View OriginalReply0
bridgeOops
· 15h ago
Data can lie; it all depends on who is telling the story. The crypto world is really good at playing this game.
In cryptocurrency market analysis, you often see this phenomenon: analysts form a conclusion first, then adjust data and models in reverse to prove it. To put it bluntly, this is to make the data obedient. Truly professional data analysts should let the data speak, rather than forcing the data to perform. The reality is that, many times, models are either not flexible enough or analysts' subjective intentions are too strong. Such routines are common in market forecasting, trading signal generation, and on-chain data interpretation. If you haven't experienced the process of "repeated validation" of data (which is actually repeated adjustment), then you probably haven't truly been in this circle.