3 ms·
Fully agreed with your overall position, but I got a small correction in regards to what you said about fintech. While you are correct in that at a lot of fina
by filoleg 4y ago
Fully agreed with your overall position, but I got a small correction in regards to what you said about fintech.
While you are correct in that at a lot of finance companies, devs just act as "support for the real business" (e.g., Goldman Sachs). But there are others where devs and quants pretty much harmoniously run the show.
Look at something like Jane Street and their tech blog[0]. Their annual "what our interns have wrought" blog posts grab my attention like nothing else, and from everything I read coming from them, it seems like engineering there is not just "support for the real business". And there are quite a few companies in fintech like this, they just won't be flashed in the mass media due to their relatively small size, but everyone in the industry (and plenty of people on the outside) knows about them. Out of all things, they are known as one of the largest contributors to OCaml language and its ecosystem.
Jane Street was just a singular example, and there are other fintech firms of a similar engineering-focused culture.
0. https://blog.janestreet.com/ https://blog.janestreet.com/
- bcj7393nsk 4y ago> but I got a small correction in regards to what you said about fintech. Market makers like Jane Street are not fintech. They are trading companies. Jane Street in particular is still very much gut-feeling point-and-click trading, compared to Jump and Citadel Securities. Fintech companies are more related to payments: Stripe, Gusto, Plaid, etc. Another difference is pay/TC: trading companies pay significantly more than fintech and MAANG, even for SWEs.