Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

JPMorgan Software Does in Seconds What Took Lawyers Many Hours

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 102 posts

Re: JPMorgan Software Does in Seconds What Took Lawyers Many Hours

#41

Post by dragonwriter »

EternalData wrote: post #36

There has always been a financial-legal-accounting complex that has accounted for some large percentage of the economy. That used to be a large part of the labor-capital compact -- at least some of the proceedings of capital were going to well-priced labourers who could build the foundations of the upper-middle class or slightly above. Capital and its holders are getting more and more naked in their attempt to save c…

> That used to be a large part of the labor-capital compact

No, it was just a necessary cost of maximizing capital returns given the available tools. Elite labor often mistook itself for a natural class ally of the capitalist class because of this, but that was a false belief driven by transitional rather than fundamental conditions.

Re: JPMorgan Software Does in Seconds What Took Lawyers Many Hours

#42

Post by fnord123 »

flat6turbo wrote: post #17
F_J_H wrote: post #3

You've likely heard the quote that "every company is a technology company", mostly used in the context of companies needing to be doing everything they can to leverage and exploit new technology, or they'll be left in the dust by more proactive competitors. With that in mind, a key quote for me in the article was this: >To help spur internal disruption, the company keeps tabs on 2,000 technology ventures, using about…

isn't that what the CIO is responsible for?

Why would the Chief Investment Officer at a bank be involved in which technologies to adopt? Or did you mean Chief Information Officer or Chief Innovation Officer (which Wikipedia says exists, but I had never heard of)?

Re: JPMorgan Software Does in Seconds What Took Lawyers Many Hours

#43

Post by eb0la »

dboreham wrote: post #35

Finally an article about self-driving lawyers. My belief is that we won't have (real) self-driving cars until long after we've automated lawyers -- legal work being a much more constrained, simpler problem without too much potential to kill people.

There are "self-driving-lawyers" for niches like this one:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyolson/2016/06/28/this-teen...

I bet the bank is offloading to "the system" the niche find-and-seek jobs that interns did before.

Something like "find me all the contracts for mortgages in seattle between 1996 and 2004 on fixed rate loan and with guarantees in the same state, and delaware, and _____".

Then bundling all to a senior lawyer and then offloading to the CRM.

Re: JPMorgan Software Does in Seconds What Took Lawyers Many Hours

#44

Post by azhenley »

fnord123 wrote: post #42
flat6turbo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

isn't that what the CIO is responsible for?

Why would the Chief Investment Officer at a bank be involved in which technologies to adopt? Or did you mean Chief Information Officer or Chief Innovation Officer (which Wikipedia says exists, but I had never heard of)?

Chief Information Officer.

She is mentioned in the first section of the article...

Re: JPMorgan Software Does in Seconds What Took Lawyers Many Hours

#45

Post by azhenley »

F_J_H wrote: post #23
flat6turbo wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

isn't that what the CIO is responsible for?

It depends on whose definition you use with respect to the CIO/CTO role. In my experience, CIOs are typically more focused on the internal IT infrastructure, keeping it secure, running smoothly, etc., (i.e. an more inward facing almost operational role), whereas a CTO should be outward facing looking and building technological advantage for the firm (i.e. a more outward facing commercial role). However, I've seen it…

From what I have seen, a lot of [smaller?] banks don't even have CTOs (including the one I worked at), just CIOs which ultimately fulfilled that role.

They might have VPs of Technology though (usually along with some other role, such as CIO).

Unfortunately, the distinction is usually lost on me too.

Re: JPMorgan Software Does in Seconds What Took Lawyers Many Hours

#46

Post by tomc1985 »

amelius wrote: post #31
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #8

Laws resemble computer programs in many ways, so I suppose it is only natural that computers be made to interpret them.

Some of my friends who are now lawyers were really bad at math in high-school, so I'm not sure that equating law to computer programs is how it works in practice.

It's not the math, it's logic. I see this parallel too -- legalese is incredibly dense because it is very specific, and its unreadability stems from (our) natural languages' disinclination towards specificity

Re: JPMorgan Software Does in Seconds What Took Lawyers Many Hours

#47

Post by js2 »

cptskippy wrote: post #40
js2 wrote: post #33

Meanwhile I'm going through a mortgage refi and the mix of old and new technology is comical. I was hoping things had advanced since I last went through this a decade ago but not so much. This is through eRates Mortgage and you might think the "e" stands for electronic, but I'm not so sure. So far I've had to: - Fill out an online credit application form, which among other things ask me what year I started my last jo…

I've done refis with several companies over the years and I've never had to do anything anywhere approaching that.

As long as the refi goes through I suppose. This lender quoted me the best rate and technology notwithstanding, otherwise seems on top of things.

Re: JPMorgan Software Does in Seconds What Took Lawyers Many Hours

#49

Post by __jal »

raverbashing wrote: post #9
tluyben2 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when Paypal decides to freeze your account because one of their algos detected "fraud" Even thinking about the times that happened to my company brings red in front of my eyes. Not many companies are that bad luckily. Google adsense/adwords comes close.

Blaming the algo is a nice cop-out by Google and Paypal and on top of that they can afford canning their customer without many issues for them But how much is that going to cost them over long term instead of having actual thinking people reviewing the cases remains to be seen

Paypal does naive keyword matching. I know this, because I used the word 'aleph' in the comments field when sending someone money, because that word was in the name of the thing I was buying.

Turns out, there is some terror group with the same word in their name.

Also turns out, PP's "sophisticated" fraud detection will hold a payment for nearly a month, when a human looking at the transaction is going to figure out it is a false-positive from a bullshit system pretty quickly.

Also turns out that apparently terrorists are somehow still capable of functioning, despite the best minds of our generation writing these super-cutting-edge detection algorithms.

I have to imagine that there are members of the set of people who are terrorists and also stupid enough to type "for the greater glory of MyTerrorGroup!" in a PP comment field, but there can't be many. And guess what? This gets everyone thinking about what sort of scanning takes place. So in the interests of catching the two idiot financiers who do this, we're teaching everyone to Be Careful What You Say.

Which, come to think of it, is probably an outcome that some are not unhappy about.

Post reply on HN