6 ms·

The writer seems mature and should go far. If he wants advice from someone in finance, I'd steer him towards Pixar. The math might be harder and the prestige m

The writer seems mature and should go far. If he wants advice from someone in finance, I'd steer him towards Pixar. The math might be harder and the prestige may be greater at the hedge fund, but making beautiful things is inherently satisfying. Sweating to make a big number get a bit bigger isn't good for the soul in the long term.

jkyle 11y ago
> Sweating to make a big number get a bit bigger isn't good for the soul in the long term. Depends on how beautiful you find the numbers you're using to get there. edit To clarify, there are personalities that derive quite a bit of pleasure from the puzzle without much regard for the picture it makes in the end.
- scrumper 11y ago
  For sure. But I thought he seemed pretty struck by the power of the art Pixar was making, talking about tearing up in the cinema. He made a few other comments about meaningfulness too - like not wanting to be eating stuff from Slice while cranking away on some obscure thing. But as others say it's totally his decision. He's clearly smart and fortunate; I'm happy for him.
santaclaus 11y ago
> The math might be harder and the prestige may be greater at the hedge fund Ehhhh, Black–Scholes vs. Navier-Stokes. Six of one, half a dozen of another...
- mathattack 11y ago
  Yes - remarkably, options are priced using the mathematical physics of heat diffusion. (& GPUs are used to speed up the calculations)
- kzhahou 11y ago
  This guy integrates!
programmer_1452 11y ago
> Sweating to make a big number get a bit bigger isn't good for the soul in the long term. I've been working as a programmer for the last 5-6 years, and I strongly disagree. Pixar, Google and Two Sigma, and many similar companies in these industries, are ultimately absolutely pointless and empty. Entertainment (distraction), ads (mind pollution), and arbitrage (stealing) is essentially what they do. Working for any of them will become mind-numbingly boring and damaging to the soul very soon. There are only two things that keep me motivated; (1) hard problems, and (2) money. (1) are hard to come by, most of my time I spend dealing with stupid problems caused by stupid people. (2) is why I work on pointless problems, the more I earn the sooner I can retire to do something actually useful. Therefore, I think that working for a hedge fund in a money-generating role can do wonders to one's motivation; the better you are, the more you earn. Not many roles, in general and in software development, offer such direct payoff.
- rwallace 11y ago
  Be that as it may, it's worth noting Google does other things as well. You could always try to get a job there working on self-driving cars (saving lives) or solar energy (saving the world).
  - kyrra 11y ago
    There is also Google's charitable arm Google.org[0][1]. [0] https://www.google.org/ https://www.google.org/ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google.org https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google.org
  - jpatokal 11y ago
    Obligatory nit: those are now things that Alphabet does, not Google.
    - CardenB 11y ago
      Google is the brand still. Plus, it's Google[X], which is a subsidiary of alphabet. So nitpick that if you want to nitpick. It still wouldn't be called Alphabet. Also you still apply to Google for the job.
drzaiusapelord 11y ago
>but making beautiful things is inherently satisfying. I like, perhaps love Pixar, but I'm not sure if I'd call, what are essentially kids movies, "beautiful things." Especially when a lot of the art design is fairly formulaic (see the Pixar face: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/inside-out/disney-pixar-characters-same-face/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/inside-out/disney-pixar-char...) Story-wise there are maybe four kid movie plots that get recycled as well. I could see a very smart and creative person feeling hamstrung in such an environment. Especially considering as kids movies they cannot explore adult topics and will always be fairly limited in scope. I also dislike that idea that automation, code, math, finance, etc can't be beautiful on its own. I'd love it if we could sell young people on the beauty of these things. Getting things like this right can be incredibly satisfying. I know its a hard sell, but most thing worthwhile are. Honestly, the worlds need less impassioned animators and comic book artists and rock stars. It needs more people able to solve hard problems, sometimes in fairly unsexy ways to an audience that may not even understand what the problem was or how difficult it was to solve. Entertainment shouldn't be a brain drain from other fields.
- kbenson 11y ago
  I'm not sure how I would classify Toy Story 3 under any recycled "kids movie" plots. The ending (the real ending, not the climax, as described in the article) is one of the most poignant moments in film I can recall. Similarly, Wall-E does a good job illustrating the human need for companionship. And the need for purpose within our lives. And at the very shallowest and most obvious level, over-consumption. Pixar often makes very "smart" animated movies, and they generally work at quite a few levels, in my opinion. > Especially considering as kids movies they cannot explore adult topics and will always be fairly limited in scope. I disagree. I've seen many masterful "childrens" movies that have done masterful jobs at exploring adult concepts, as long as by "adult" you don't just mean sexuality. While childrens' movies may be constrained on some axis, they are often freer on others. Additionally, there is the chance to speak to people that wouldn't normally go to a movie about some of these adult messages, or to reach them when they aren't expecting it and are less cynical. Who goes to see an animated film about a family of super heroes to see a touching rendition of mid-life crisis?
yellowstuff 11y ago
> Sweating to make a big number get a bit bigger isn't good for the soul in the long term. Speak for yourself. I've worked in finance for more than 10 years and like my job. Most of the time I work on interesting problems with smart people under good work conditions, and get paid well to do it. It helps that I work in an area of finance I feel does have positive social value, although doing work I am good at and find interesting is more of a motivation.
- PopeOfNope 11y ago
  Do you feel comfortable discussing your work a bit more? It's not often I see the words "finance" and "positive social value" used in the same sentence.
  - ericjang 11y ago
    One example: TS and many hedge funds manage portfolios for large charities, university endowments, and pension funds, among other clients. This means more money for clients who do good for the world.
    - beagle3 11y ago
      Does TS actually do that? Aren't they doing proprietary trading (exclusively or almost so)?
      - jchendy 11y ago
        "Our clients are real people and include some of the world’s largest public and corporate pension plans, sovereign wealth funds, research institutions, educational endowments, healthcare systems and foundations." http://www.twosigma.com/impact http://www.twosigma.com/impact
  - yellowstuff 11y ago
    I think that well functioning financial markets have huge social value. Let's contrast the mortgage market in 2007 (finance gone wrong) with the stock market when it functions normally. This description is idealized and somewhat self-serving, but I think it is a useful model. In 2007 key players (mortgage originators, banks, ratings agencies, governmental agencies and investors) only had incentives for mortgage prices to go up. It was hard to bet on prices going down, and even when you could it was hard to get enough information to realize how overpriced mortgages were. This poorly functioning market resulted in disaster. The stock market has much more information available, and it is usually easy to bet against prices that are too high. The collective intelligence of many smart people determines stock prices using money, a powerful incentive to get things right. This results in a liquid, well-functioning market with many positive social effects. Google exists today in part because an angel investor knew that if the company succeeded there were well-functioning public markets to sell into. While it's popular to say that the stock market influences company behavior negatively, and causes "short-termism", I believe the opposite: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/08/24/the-short-termism-myth http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/08/24/the-short-termi... The market often imposes discipline on managers who would otherwise run companies for their own benefit at the expense of everyone else. You can tell a similar story for the social benefits of lending money, and the importance of doing it well. The world has seen a vast improvement in wealth, health, education, and safety in the last 100 years, and I think a large contributor is a financial system that has enabled and rewarded socially useful enterprises. As I said, this is an oversimplification, and a lot of smart people completely disagree. I don't deny that there are jobs in finance that seem to me to be pure rent-seeking, with negative social value. However, I think that overall the system works well, and that the work I do makes it run a tiny bit better.

jkyle 11y ago

> Sweating to make a big number get a bit bigger isn't good for the soul in the long term. Depends on how beautiful you find the numbers you're using to get there. edit To clarify, there are personalities that derive quite a bit of pleasure from the puzzle without much regard for the picture it makes in the end.

scrumper 11y ago
For sure. But I thought he seemed pretty struck by the power of the art Pixar was making, talking about tearing up in the cinema. He made a few other comments about meaningfulness too - like not wanting to be eating stuff from Slice while cranking away on some obscure thing. But as others say it's totally his decision. He's clearly smart and fortunate; I'm happy for him.

santaclaus 11y ago

> The math might be harder and the prestige may be greater at the hedge fund Ehhhh, Black–Scholes vs. Navier-Stokes. Six of one, half a dozen of another...

mathattack 11y ago
Yes - remarkably, options are priced using the mathematical physics of heat diffusion. (& GPUs are used to speed up the calculations)
kzhahou 11y ago
This guy integrates!

programmer_1452 11y ago

> Sweating to make a big number get a bit bigger isn't good for the soul in the long term. I've been working as a programmer for the last 5-6 years, and I strongly disagree. Pixar, Google and Two Sigma, and many similar companies in these industries, are ultimately absolutely pointless and empty. Entertainment (distraction), ads (mind pollution), and arbitrage (stealing) is essentially what they do. Working for any of them will become mind-numbingly boring and damaging to the soul very soon. There are only two things that keep me motivated; (1) hard problems, and (2) money. (1) are hard to come by, most of my time I spend dealing with stupid problems caused by stupid people. (2) is why I work on pointless problems, the more I earn the sooner I can retire to do something actually useful. Therefore, I think that working for a hedge fund in a money-generating role can do wonders to one's motivation; the better you are, the more you earn. Not many roles, in general and in software development, offer such direct payoff.

rwallace 11y ago
Be that as it may, it's worth noting Google does other things as well. You could always try to get a job there working on self-driving cars (saving lives) or solar energy (saving the world).
- kyrra 11y ago
  There is also Google's charitable arm Google.org[0][1]. [0] https://www.google.org/ https://www.google.org/ [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google.org https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google.org
- jpatokal 11y ago
  Obligatory nit: those are now things that Alphabet does, not Google.
  - CardenB 11y ago
    Google is the brand still. Plus, it's Google[X], which is a subsidiary of alphabet. So nitpick that if you want to nitpick. It still wouldn't be called Alphabet. Also you still apply to Google for the job.

drzaiusapelord 11y ago

>but making beautiful things is inherently satisfying. I like, perhaps love Pixar, but I'm not sure if I'd call, what are essentially kids movies, "beautiful things." Especially when a lot of the art design is fairly formulaic (see the Pixar face: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/inside-out/disney-pixar-characters-same-face/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/film/inside-out/disney-pixar-char...) Story-wise there are maybe four kid movie plots that get recycled as well. I could see a very smart and creative person feeling hamstrung in such an environment. Especially considering as kids movies they cannot explore adult topics and will always be fairly limited in scope. I also dislike that idea that automation, code, math, finance, etc can't be beautiful on its own. I'd love it if we could sell young people on the beauty of these things. Getting things like this right can be incredibly satisfying. I know its a hard sell, but most thing worthwhile are. Honestly, the worlds need less impassioned animators and comic book artists and rock stars. It needs more people able to solve hard problems, sometimes in fairly unsexy ways to an audience that may not even understand what the problem was or how difficult it was to solve. Entertainment shouldn't be a brain drain from other fields.

kbenson 11y ago
I'm not sure how I would classify Toy Story 3 under any recycled "kids movie" plots. The ending (the real ending, not the climax, as described in the article) is one of the most poignant moments in film I can recall. Similarly, Wall-E does a good job illustrating the human need for companionship. And the need for purpose within our lives. And at the very shallowest and most obvious level, over-consumption. Pixar often makes very "smart" animated movies, and they generally work at quite a few levels, in my opinion. > Especially considering as kids movies they cannot explore adult topics and will always be fairly limited in scope. I disagree. I've seen many masterful "childrens" movies that have done masterful jobs at exploring adult concepts, as long as by "adult" you don't just mean sexuality. While childrens' movies may be constrained on some axis, they are often freer on others. Additionally, there is the chance to speak to people that wouldn't normally go to a movie about some of these adult messages, or to reach them when they aren't expecting it and are less cynical. Who goes to see an animated film about a family of super heroes to see a touching rendition of mid-life crisis?

yellowstuff 11y ago

> Sweating to make a big number get a bit bigger isn't good for the soul in the long term. Speak for yourself. I've worked in finance for more than 10 years and like my job. Most of the time I work on interesting problems with smart people under good work conditions, and get paid well to do it. It helps that I work in an area of finance I feel does have positive social value, although doing work I am good at and find interesting is more of a motivation.

PopeOfNope 11y ago
Do you feel comfortable discussing your work a bit more? It's not often I see the words "finance" and "positive social value" used in the same sentence.
- ericjang 11y ago
  One example: TS and many hedge funds manage portfolios for large charities, university endowments, and pension funds, among other clients. This means more money for clients who do good for the world.
  - beagle3 11y ago
    Does TS actually do that? Aren't they doing proprietary trading (exclusively or almost so)?
    - jchendy 11y ago
      "Our clients are real people and include some of the world’s largest public and corporate pension plans, sovereign wealth funds, research institutions, educational endowments, healthcare systems and foundations." http://www.twosigma.com/impact http://www.twosigma.com/impact
- yellowstuff 11y ago
  I think that well functioning financial markets have huge social value. Let's contrast the mortgage market in 2007 (finance gone wrong) with the stock market when it functions normally. This description is idealized and somewhat self-serving, but I think it is a useful model. In 2007 key players (mortgage originators, banks, ratings agencies, governmental agencies and investors) only had incentives for mortgage prices to go up. It was hard to bet on prices going down, and even when you could it was hard to get enough information to realize how overpriced mortgages were. This poorly functioning market resulted in disaster. The stock market has much more information available, and it is usually easy to bet against prices that are too high. The collective intelligence of many smart people determines stock prices using money, a powerful incentive to get things right. This results in a liquid, well-functioning market with many positive social effects. Google exists today in part because an angel investor knew that if the company succeeded there were well-functioning public markets to sell into. While it's popular to say that the stock market influences company behavior negatively, and causes "short-termism", I believe the opposite: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/08/24/the-short-termism-myth http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/08/24/the-short-termi... The market often imposes discipline on managers who would otherwise run companies for their own benefit at the expense of everyone else. You can tell a similar story for the social benefits of lending money, and the importance of doing it well. The world has seen a vast improvement in wealth, health, education, and safety in the last 100 years, and I think a large contributor is a financial system that has enabled and rewarded socially useful enterprises. As I said, this is an oversimplification, and a lot of smart people completely disagree. I don't deny that there are jobs in finance that seem to me to be pure rent-seeking, with negative social value. However, I think that overall the system works well, and that the work I do makes it run a tiny bit better.