Comments on: Financial engineering as a career: Part 2 http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/2011/07/07/financial-engineering-as-a-career-part-2/ Models.Behaving.Badly Fri, 14 Sep 2012 09:10:53 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: EmanuelDerman http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/2011/07/07/financial-engineering-as-a-career-part-2/#comment-952 Wed, 18 Jul 2012 17:54:39 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/?p=105#comment-952 To Jedkins:
Thanks for the comment. In fact, at this year’s keynote, I did say some more about ethics. I welcome suggestions for what to tell students.

But it’s kind of hard to know what to say about the fact that Wall Street pays so much more than theoretical physics. And doing physics can be discouraging.

Goldman pays 44% of their profit to employees. Nice work if you can get it, I suppose, but it’s suppressing their share price when employees do so much better than shareholders in a public company.

]]>
By: jedkins http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/2011/07/07/financial-engineering-as-a-career-part-2/#comment-950 Wed, 18 Jul 2012 04:58:11 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/?p=105#comment-950 You might want to consider adding a few things about ethics and attitude on your next keynote. Seems like the unpreceeded bonuses at wall street nowadays makes everyone there feel like much more important to society than for example a scientist at fermilab. About the comment on how quants add more social value, seriously? That’s what quants keep telling themselves to justify their earnings?
How can’t you tell that prof Derman could have a much greater impact to society if he had a career in theoritical physics?
A few things to note from someone in the physics field.

]]>
By: jedkins http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/2011/07/07/financial-engineering-as-a-career-part-2/#comment-949 Wed, 18 Jul 2012 04:55:18 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/?p=105#comment-949 You might want to consider adding a few things about ethics and attitude on your next keynote. Seems like the unpreceeded bonuses at wall street nowadays makes everyone there feel like much more important to society than for example a scientist at fermilab. About the comment on how quants add more social value, seriously? That’s what quants keep telling themselves to justify their earnings?
How can’t you tell that prof Derman could have a much greater impact to society if he had a career in theoritical physics?
A few things to note from someone in the physics field.

]]>
By: Jeffrey. http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/2011/07/07/financial-engineering-as-a-career-part-2/#comment-49 Thu, 14 Jul 2011 03:28:24 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/?p=105#comment-49 Thanks for Part 2.
Quant is better pay than all other fields maybe except traders.
It is challenging work and makes real money as oppose to theoretical research

]]>
By: Emanuel Derman http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/2011/07/07/financial-engineering-as-a-career-part-2/#comment-45 Mon, 11 Jul 2011 22:09:04 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/?p=105#comment-45 By things that last for ever, I mean chemistry, physics, mathematics, biology in the sciences, and literature and history and philosophy in the arts, for a start.

By clarity I mean simply clarity about the way the world works and in the Socratic sense, that is both of the things you mentioned.

Thanks.

]]>
By: DalekSec http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/2011/07/07/financial-engineering-as-a-career-part-2/#comment-24 Sat, 09 Jul 2011 00:47:23 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/?p=105#comment-24 If quants can develop a better understanding of financial risk, that alone might provide social justification for their careers.

It’s hard to believe the finance industry destroyed $trillions in value out of spite. More likely: financial professionals failed to recognize the dangers of their actions. If greed alone caused people to disregard evidence of an impending bubble-and-crash, then no equations could have stopped them. But what if ignorance was a bigger culprit than greed, and ratings agencies, regulators, and banks only vaguely understood the risks they created?

If so, then we could all benefit from better tools for predicting financial disasters. Quant research won’t save us from market crashes, but it might help. Radar and GPS don’t eliminated shipwrecks, but they do provide safer navigation and faster rescues. If quants can build more reliable “financial radars” for investors and regulators, the result could be safer markets for everyone.

]]>
By: TimothyB http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/2011/07/07/financial-engineering-as-a-career-part-2/#comment-21 Fri, 08 Jul 2011 23:35:24 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/?p=105#comment-21 As a reader of yours for years, being able to add a comment to your musings is a treat. It’s nice to see you posting here.

A few questions, earnestly, on this particular post: What in today’s academic currciulum might pass for “really solid things that will last forever”? I suppose an education in the classics might be a start, but, on the other hand, the it is self-evident that the so-called dead languages are already defunct.

Another part of the post seems curious, inasmuch as an acknowledgment of self-interest is articulated, followed upon immediately with an appeal toward the pursuit of clarity. Clarity about what? Is that exhortation intended in the Socratic sense of being clear about oneself, or being clear about how heuristics and biases work in the real world … or how to maximise profits, or something else entirely? Closer to Platonism or the Tao? Cheers.

]]>
By: jbernar http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/2011/07/07/financial-engineering-as-a-career-part-2/#comment-16 Fri, 08 Jul 2011 15:53:12 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/emanuelderman/?p=105#comment-16 One thing you don’t emphasize enough: if you go into finance you can lose a lot of money for other people, like Scholes. In academics, not so much . . .

I was going to recommend a couple of essays by Max Weber — then I read your Part 1. Incidentally, the title one of these essays has sometimes been translated “Scholarship as a Vocation” (Not “Science.”) I think it’s more apt.

I guess I reveal which side of the dividing line I fall on!

]]>