11–20 of 157 posts
I will eternally find it sad how much talent is wasted on trading. So much money, so much intelligence, so much time and effort, all the provide almost no tangible value to society.
Who elected you Supreme Leader?
I will eternally find it sad how much talent is wasted on trading. So much money, so much intelligence, so much time and effort, all the provide almost no tangible value to society.
I will eternally find it sad how much talent is wasted on trading. So much money, so much intelligence, so much time and effort, all the provide almost no tangible value to society.
The alternative to highly technical, agile quantitative trading is fat middle men, wide spreads, and capital sitting in 8%* stupider places than it would otherwise. That’s a pretty big deal even if the observable effects are extremely diffuse.
* Made up number, but if we woke up on Monday with nothing but the tech we used to trade in 1984 it would probably hit much worse.
I will eternally find it sad how much talent is wasted on trading. So much money, so much intelligence, so much time and effort, all the provide almost no tangible value to society.
I agree, how dull and uninspired. I'm very much with Paul Graham, who believes in the creation of wealth (as opposed to the extraction of money).
I'd definitionally describe all voluntary transactions free of coercion to imply the buyer values the utility of what they're buying (i.e. true wealth - piles of currency are not true wealth, they're what you exchange for true wealth) more than the currency they're trading for it, no?
Involuntary transactions featuring coercion on the other hand, like the government demanding you pay taxes under threat of imprisonment (enforced at gunpoint, if necessary) are clearly extractive, by my definition.
> In Young Cho thought she was going to be a doctor but fell into a trading internship at Jane Street Genuinely perplexing how they always try to show each multi-million earning engineer as some normal person and not someone that went to Exeter and Harvard
There are places that without that Ivy League or Target School degree you don't hear back, I don't think Jane Street is one of them.
I will eternally find it sad how much talent is wasted on trading. So much money, so much intelligence, so much time and effort, all the provide almost no tangible value to society.
He replied with, roughly, "Those of you who work here probably couldn't do anything else other than perhaps math research. Arguably, working here is the economically efficient use of your time."
I think about whenever I see a comment like this. Quant firms select for a very specific set of skills. In particular, I've found that many traders/software engineers in quant are very smart but not very self-directed. Places like Jane Street work well for people who can excel, but only when given a lot of structure and direction. I think this is not unrelated to why so many people 'accidentally' end up as traders after going to an Ivy League school!
I will eternally find it sad how much talent is wasted on trading. So much money, so much intelligence, so much time and effort, all the provide almost no tangible value to society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, how dull and uninspired. I'm very much with Paul Graham, who believes in the creation of wealth (as opposed to the extraction of money).
Can you codify the difference? I seem to be fundamentally misunderstanding the difference between wealth creation and wealth extraction if voluntary market activity constitutes extraction. I'd definitionally describe all voluntary transactions free of coercion to imply the buyer values the utility of what they're buying (i.e. true wealth - piles of currency are not true wealth, they're what you exchange for true weal…
Wealth Creation: creating new pie.
In practice, a lot of things that look extractive (e.g., designing better high frequency trading algorithms) potentially have some marginal utility (e.g., creating market liquidity), but the money high performing people make is likely larger than the utility they add to the system (because most of the money in having the best high frequency trading algorithm comes from beating other people's high frequency trading algorithms).
I will eternally find it sad how much talent is wasted on trading. So much money, so much intelligence, so much time and effort, all the provide almost no tangible value to society.
I take the silver lining. Smart people getting rich is better than dumb people getting rich. Hopefully some day they'll do something good with that money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I take the silver lining. Smart people getting rich is better than dumb people getting rich. Hopefully some day they'll do something good with that money.
The problem is that smart people are the ones being employed, not the ones getting rich.