Had to triple check that this wasn't satire after reading the first two points. Focusing on familiarity with buzzwords and trendy tools is exactly the wrong thing to do.
I see, so you're saying the expected profit on the trade is $0 assuming an efficient market and ignoring trading costs? Your comment is confusing the way it's worded because the expected value of the option is non-zero.
“actualllllyyyyy” he’s saying something different. If you take a 0.3% chance for N days where N is large, you’ll land it 0.003N times, or once every ~333 days.
The chance of landing it within any particular window of K days is a different concept (which you showed how to reason about).
Depends on your field. If you're studying mathematics or computer science, learning happens mostly through deep work in isolation and there's enough material out there (books, papers, etc.) to support more than a lifetime of problem-solving.
Events and conversations might offer superficial exposure to new ideas or areas of interest but actual understanding requires extended, focused thought that nobody else can do for you.
You need to be smarter than volume-weighted average, not smarter than the average participant. The demographic you have in mind is trading relatively small amounts of capital.
Calculating opportunity cost for time spent based on wages is pretty meaningless for salaried jobs. I might make $X/hr at my day job, but I don't actually have the ability to work an extra hour and get an extra X dollars.