4 ms·
> what really limits most financial institutions from embracing a lot more modern tech is their core systems of record AND the acceptance of said systems by the
by nstj 10y ago
> what really limits most financial institutions from embracing a lot more modern tech is their core systems of record AND the acceptance of said systems by their governing agencies
I tend to think (from experience) that the reason banks don't embrace modern tech is inertia - they've been able to "milk the cow" of regulatory body sanctioned profits for so long that they're in a mindset of not wishing to introduce volatility into what has been a highly predictable revenue stream. They've been using garbage technology for so long and making money at the same time that there has been no institutional impetus to innovate and embrace new tech. This is now coming to bite them in the ass as regulatory bodies are allowing new players to market and therefore eroding some of the guaranteed profits banks enjoyed up until now.
I doubt most large capital markets institutions (on both the retail and IB sides) will be able to weather the current (and impending) storm of disruption and come out unscathed.
- raesene6 10y agoI'd say inertia is a large factor but also risk aversion. Bank systems have to be very available (or they attract large fines) and so there's a tendency to stick with things that are proven to be robust even when they have other problems. The other major problem I've seen is that most banks don't think of themselves as technology companies, and treat IT as an overhead to be minimized, which is absolutely the wrong approach. This tends to lead to things that save money in the short term (e.g. outsourcing deals) but could well cost money in the longer term, as they make replacing legacy systems harder.
- riskable 10y agoThis is nonsense. Not every system in banks needs to be highly available. That's just silly. Like the print server on the 3rd floor needs an active standby! Haha. No, just like any organization banks have "critical" systems and "everything else." Docker is mostly being "sold" as a means to replace and improve the non-critical stuff. Like that internal web app everyone uses to look up <whatever>. Or the system that generates daily reports on <whatever>. Just like most organizations, banks have a few critical systems and everything else is less so (to varying degrees).
- raesene6 10y agoyes and the topic of discussion in this thread is ..... core banking systems.... which do have to be highly available. If the topic had been bank print servers and I had made my comment yours may have made more sense My comment didn't say "banks print servers need to be highly available" anywhere.. at all..
- user5994461 10y ago> I tend to think (from experience) that the reason banks don't embrace modern tech is inertia A lot of inertia. A lot of new-hype-tech is unreliable undocumented shit not ready for production. A lot of new-tech-is-old-tech that's been done for many years but with a new name. Whenever someone asks "why don't you use Docker for xxx?" Reply with "When is the last time you had an issue with Docker? Tell me about it." You'll LOVE the horror stories <3
- nickpsecurity 10y ago"You'll LOVE the horror stories <3" It's even better when you're on a site like Hacker News with stronger-than-average, technical people. You get to read endorsements of the latest and greatest with people asking why (insert failure of common action here) is happening... in the same thread. I'll just stick with a hardened, flexible configuration of classic architecture and components that work.
- KirinDave 10y agoYes I'd hesitate to use Docker in a system I wanted to maintain for 10 years. We can't get consistent interfaces for 2 months!