The mystique of Goldman Sachs

One thing HN might care about: 3 years ago, 25% of Goldman employees worked in the IT division. They probably had more developers than Facebook and LinkedIn combined.

http://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-has-more-engine...

Re: The mystique of Goldman Sachs

#5

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 3:59 PM UTC

StClaire wrote: post #4

One thing HN might care about: 3 years ago, 25% of Goldman employees worked in the IT division. They probably had more developers than Facebook and LinkedIn combined. http://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-has-more-engine...

[deleted]

Re: The mystique of Goldman Sachs

#6

Post by jbob2000 » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:02 PM UTC

StClaire wrote: post #4

One thing HN might care about: 3 years ago, 25% of Goldman employees worked in the IT division. They probably had more developers than Facebook and LinkedIn combined. http://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-has-more-engine...

It's disgusting to me that that much brainpower was/is dedicated to stock trading. All that programming and the only thing we get for it is that we can correctly value a company.

Re: The mystique of Goldman Sachs

#7

Post by akhilcacharya » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:02 PM UTC

StClaire wrote: post #4

One thing HN might care about: 3 years ago, 25% of Goldman employees worked in the IT division. They probably had more developers than Facebook and LinkedIn combined. http://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-has-more-engine...

During my onsite they said they had an even bigger percentage.

Re: The mystique of Goldman Sachs

#8

Post by Wonnk13 » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:05 PM UTC

I've been thinking about applying to their IT / analytics teams in the SLC office. Curious if anyone has any anecdotes about the environment. I've worked in financial institutions before, but curious how it compares to the FANGs. I've met really smart people in both environments.

Re: The mystique of Goldman Sachs

#9

Post by NikolaeVarius » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:06 PM UTC

jbob2000 wrote: post #6

StClaire wrote: post #4

One thing HN might care about: 3 years ago, 25% of Goldman employees worked in the IT division. They probably had more developers than Facebook and LinkedIn combined. http://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-has-more-engine...

It's disgusting to me that that much brainpower was/is dedicated to stock trading. All that programming and the only thing we get for it is that we can correctly value a company.

Its insane that you think this is the case.

The markets are an incredibly important part of the economy and this technology does not only simply value a company.

Re: The mystique of Goldman Sachs

#10

Post by SegFaultx64 » Thu, Dec 15, 2016, 4:08 PM UTC

jbob2000 wrote: post #6

StClaire wrote: post #4

One thing HN might care about: 3 years ago, 25% of Goldman employees worked in the IT division. They probably had more developers than Facebook and LinkedIn combined. http://www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-has-more-engine...

It's disgusting to me that that much brainpower was/is dedicated to stock trading. All that programming and the only thing we get for it is that we can correctly value a company.

Not going to comment specifically on the judgement (I agree in general terms).

However that is a vast mis-understanding of what a lot of the brain power at an investment bank goes towards. It isn't just equities it is fixed-income and economics as well.

But beyond that it isn't just about valuation. It is everything from working on how to actually clear transactions, building dark pools and similar platforms, research and building very real tech on blockchain, building security and infrastructure tooling.

Goldman literally invented a programming language (although it is showing it's age at this point). They make very robust Open Source contributions: https://github.com/goldmansachs/gs-collections (just an example).

Regardless of if what they do is immoral or silly or both, they are building interesting stuff and solving hard problems.

A better organization to direct a dig like that at would someone like Bridgewater, they really are just trying to value equites, and fixed-income.