121–130 of 155 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have a feeling someone said the same thing 10 or 20 years ago.
They DID say the same thing 10-20 years ago, and they were CORRECT. Ever try to build a web application in Assembly language or C? It would probably be pretty difficult. You don't have to do that anymore. 1 web developer can do more work today than 100 assembly developers could, from 50 years ago.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Absolutely, but isn't this type of software generally used to augment existing jobs, rather than replace them? The program can make basic inferences like "10 negative GE articles -> Sell GE stock", but you still need a human to make more general decisions about an industry as a whole, related companies, how long-term an issue is, etc. Basically, nobody's job is as simple as reading the news and deciding whether artic…
>Absolutely, but isn't this type of software generally used to augment existing jobs, rather than replace them? Is there a difference? If a person does 10x as much you need 1/10th as many of them.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's kind of a joke. People getting rich off moving money around is kind of silly, and it would certainly be better if those jobs could be eliminated by machines.
Oh, don't worry. People will still get rich off of those transactions.
...Even if this vision occurs, it's not obvious how soon it would occur. For example, will we need stable-value cryptocurrencies before any of this can occur? Will anything significant occur in the next two years, or will it be five? OR more?
I am curious how the compensation of the engineers compares to that of the traders, whose job function their systems have replaced. Not only base salary, but bonuses, commissions, and all those extras. Do the engineers get comparable extras, or are they a "flat cost"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The terrifying thing is that you don't even need to reach human-level performance to cause structural unemployment. As a hypothetical example, if automation can make top-performers in your field 10x more efficient, that makes 90% of people in that role redundant. This feels a lot scarier to me since as a ML engineer, I rarely see applications where we can reach human level performance easily but the idea of making ex…
I guess they can all become Javascript developers and fulfill the big tech companies' dreams of having hordes of cheap engineers on the labor market. That would help save some of the money poured into various initiatives like 'Dolphins who code', etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess they can all become Javascript developers and fulfill the big tech companies' dreams of having hordes of cheap engineers on the labor market. That would help save some of the money poured into various initiatives like 'Dolphins who code', etc.
What is wrong with being a JavaScript developer?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>But of your job is to look at data and make descisions based on that data, you're gonna be the first to go. I posted the other day about machine learning and radiology. It's the type of job that squarely fits your definition, although things move much more solely in medicine.
My dad is a neuroradiologist so I've seen a decent amount of the reading work (which is one component of the job - though a big one). I also thought it'd be well suited to ML, but I suspect the future is more suggestions and flagging things in scans rather than entirely replacing the doctor (I'd be surprised if this isn't happening already in some capacity). It seems risky to lose the human understanding and interpre…
They have been, de facto, replaced by computers, even if the job role still exists.
It's easier to see this if you break down the work not into images but into human-image-minutes. If there are 100 minutes of work, but you can assign the computer 50 of them which it can complete in seconds, the same number of human-image-minutes can be completed as before, but the computer has now taken them away from a human.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>But of your job is to look at data and make descisions based on that data, you're gonna be the first to go. I posted the other day about machine learning and radiology. It's the type of job that squarely fits your definition, although things move much more solely in medicine.
My dad is a neuroradiologist so I've seen a decent amount of the reading work (which is one component of the job - though a big one). I also thought it'd be well suited to ML, but I suspect the future is more suggestions and flagging things in scans rather than entirely replacing the doctor (I'd be surprised if this isn't happening already in some capacity). It seems risky to lose the human understanding and interpre…
Most of the automation work I do in financial services is a 90% automation. This leaves room for more analytical tasks where people can free up time to drive more business decisions and insights.
A lot of dope smoking in this article. There are a handful of markets that are large and liquid enough to fully move to electronic trading, like spot FX, vanilla interest rate swaps, perhaps treasuries trading. But most other markets are very much relationship driven. For instance a trader will make a market on illiquid bonds based on what he thinks is the appetite from the short list of potential buyers, and that's…
Your comment is spot on. The work Goldman Sachs does is relationship driven. As a corporate client of GS, I don't need data. I need advice. Don't confuse the work that investment banks do with the work that NASDAQ does or with high-frequency trading. In addition, the reason why GS has less traders and more developers is more to do with government regulations preventing GS from doing certain types of trading. Not beca…
And you will get better advice when that advice is data-driven. And you need the data because it's GS's proprietary data. If you're paying for a relationship, all you're really paying for is a smiling human face to read the numbers on the screen to you.