91–100 of 232 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is the classical hn bias. Normal people would like to talk to humans. Hn users would rather get info, plans, etc from houses and eventually buy them and sign the contract using a REST API with a node.js client..
That's a rational buyer...what do you think the bank does? They run the numbers to see if the person qualifies, has great credit, etc...do you think they care how your day is going? Lol...
because traders are used to seeing such predictions fail. Reuters was trading FX electronically since the early 1990s. At the tier one IB I worked for the IT budget was 500m USD a year (across products), and that was in 1997! Huge resources were thrown at automation. However, to this day, large trades in FX (> 10m USD notional) are still almost exclusively performed by humans over a telephone or over the bloomberg me…
Machine learning is "learning from data." It is not the assumption that there are no dynamics, and that the future will simply be a repetition of the past. To the extent that the future is predictable, learning from data is the best that can be done. The reality is that speech recognition, language translation, face recognition, object classification and detection, semantic segmentation, speech and image synthesis ha…
because traders are used to seeing such predictions fail. Reuters was trading FX electronically since the early 1990s. At the tier one IB I worked for the IT budget was 500m USD a year (across products), and that was in 1997! Huge resources were thrown at automation. However, to this day, large trades in FX (> 10m USD notional) are still almost exclusively performed by humans over a telephone or over the bloomberg me…
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-13/this-bank...
There seems to be some confusion going on about investment bankers and traders in the discussion. Trading has been changing significantly since the 'big bang' when trading went from pits to electronic. From there on in you see the evolution of algorithm / program trading. This area has been using quants for decades at this point. There are a good few big names brands out there that are known for being 'algorithmic he…
Automation has happened incrementally in the industry for years, like many others - starting with the easiest stuff (low hanging fruit) like some operations tasks and mechanical trading tasks, and leaving the more complex tasks for humans - or letting a human scale to do more.
The more complex tasks that are left typically require non-trivial intelligence, e.g. understanding why the new product brought to market by your competitor or counterparty is slightly different to what you are trading today, and deciding if you can/should transact in it. Understanding what impact the upcoming compliance rule changes have on your market and activities (there are always regulatory rule changes). Understanding what the limits of your trading are, to avoid concentrating too much exposure in one area. Understanding why your counterparty is upset about some aspect of the transaction. etc.
Everybody feels their job is safe from automation. Its the same way planes crash but not mine . Believing "I am special", is just built into us.
Not only do I believe that my job can be automated - I've spent years trying to do just that. Of course, I wouldn't be giving the scripts to my employer, just spending more time doing other things...
Are you sure you haven't perhaps fallen prey to too much job security? Such a large sense of job security that you don't care about automating X part of it away. You, like me, like other "rockstar" software developers, (perhaps[0]) believe it doesn't matter if you automate X, Y, Z, because you're so good, that when you're out of responsibilities you will be offered the followup/orthogonal tasks 1, 2, 3.
Anyways, I'm just trying to highlight that you too, perhaps subconsciously, think "I am special, it wont happen to me", because at least I who also don't care about automation feel this way.
[0] I know for me, this is the truth. This overconfidence is why I don't care about automating my tasks away. Honestly, even giving the scripts to my employer makes little difference to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Machine learning is "learning from data." It is not the assumption that there are no dynamics, and that the future will simply be a repetition of the past. To the extent that the future is predictable, learning from data is the best that can be done. The reality is that speech recognition, language translation, face recognition, object classification and detection, semantic segmentation, speech and image synthesis ha…
The difference is that chess, go, etc are all essentially rules based. Finance has very few rules that do not break over time. Just look at QE. Arguably the financial market represents the collective intelligence of a huge amount of very clever people. Machines are only just starting to challenge a single human at a rules-based activity. We're very far from beating a brutally darwinian, impressively adaptive, human h…
Well, an equally good question is why do programmers feel their jobs are immune from AI, etc.?
because traders are used to seeing such predictions fail. Reuters was trading FX electronically since the early 1990s. At the tier one IB I worked for the IT budget was 500m USD a year (across products), and that was in 1997! Huge resources were thrown at automation. However, to this day, large trades in FX (> 10m USD notional) are still almost exclusively performed by humans over a telephone or over the bloomberg me…
> Also, high finance is not just about what you know. It's inevitably about who you know, about "illogical" factors such as salesperson charisma, entertainment, and most importantly, a credible personality type that understands the edge case risks That explains the LIBOR scandal.