[HN Gopher] How Bank of America Ignores Its Own Rules to Prevent...
___________________________________________________________________
How Bank of America Ignores Its Own Rules to Prevent Dangerous
Workloads
Author : nradov
Score : 34 points
Date : 2024-08-12 15:49 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.wsj.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.wsj.com)
| somastoma wrote:
| And we are surprised by this?
| ok123456 wrote:
| Can't read. WSJ thinks I'm a bot.
| hooverd wrote:
| I believe you, but can I get your opinion on flipped over
| turtles in the desert first? s/
|
| I don't think it's Firefox, I get the paywall but I'm not
| blocked.
| hooverd wrote:
| The title is missing meant; in full it's "How Bank of America
| Ignores Its Own Rules Meant to Prevent Dangerous Workloads." I
| think that changes the meaning at a first glance, like this was
| about dangerous workloads in the computer-y sense.
|
| I thought this was common in lots of corporate environments. You
| don't have to work overtime, wink wink, but it would be
| implicitly bad for your career if you didn't.
| tiltowait wrote:
| Wow, that changes the meaning completely.
| xeromal wrote:
| Can't read
| OutOfHere wrote:
| When I was younger, I used to think that it was honorable to work
| long hours, including overnight, for an employer. As I grew
| older, I realized it was so unfair, especially considering that
| the bosses would never put in even a regular full day of effort,
| and would undermine my work with bad managerial decisions. Just
| because they put in extra effort at some point twenty years ago
| doesn't entitle them to do that to me now.
|
| Regarding being an investment banker, if you're intelligent, it's
| imho better to earn your capital and then do your own investment
| banking for yourself, not for someone else.
| zer0tonin wrote:
| > Regarding being an investment banker, if you're intelligent,
| it's imho better to earn your capital and then do your own
| investment banking for yourself, not for someone else.
|
| Investment banking isn't "owning a bunch of stocks"
| ForOldHack wrote:
| Investment banking is SELLING a bunch of stock, to collect
| commissions, and when you make a bad decision, covering it
| up. See 'Boiler Room.'
| NovemberWhiskey wrote:
| No, a boiler room operation is typically a brokerage, which
| is a completely different kind of a business from an
| investment bank.
| OutOfHere wrote:
| Whatever it is, the end result for the worker is the same if
| not better via stocks and derivatives. There is no relative
| benefit for an intelligent individual to being an investment
| banker.
| NovemberWhiskey wrote:
| For those who are clueless on this: the primary work of
| "investment bankers" is providing advice to corporate clients
| on raising capital (through market offerings like bonds and
| stocks), mergers and acquisitions, and also by underwriting
| transactions where they act as a middleman between the client
| and the market - classic case is the IPO.
|
| This is distinct from market making, which is buying and
| selling securities in the market, albeit that investment
| banks often have strong market making operations as well.
|
| It's also distinct from asset management, which is the
| business of taking money from people and investing it for
| them through e.g. funds.
|
| This article is about the first kind of investment banking,
| which is legendary for ludicrous overloads for analysts
| (hires direct from school) during their first few years.
| Those that survive often go to B school, get their MBAs and
| come back as associates; but this is also a pipeline that
| leads into other finance careers like private equity.
| alephnerd wrote:
| > Those that survive often go to B school, get their MBAs
| and come back as associates
|
| If you're already an analyst and not (completely) burned
| out by 70-90 hour weeks you are becoming an associate
| within 2-3 years.
|
| You use the MBA to exit out of IB into VC, PE, PM, CorpDev,
| etc.
|
| This is also why tech became so popular over the past
| decade - new grads are earning IB level compensation with
| significantly better WLB and less barrier to entry, and
| most analysts are now STEM or STEM Adjacent majors.
| tivert wrote:
| > When I was younger, I used to think that it was honorable to
| work long hours, including overnight, for an employer.
|
| That is a foolish idea planted in the minds of the young and
| naive to prime them for exploitation.
| NovemberWhiskey wrote:
| IB analysts are not dumb - they put up with this because the
| worst of it only lasts for a few years, and on the other side
| are huge riches.
| impossiblefork wrote:
| If they work long nights, they will be dumb eventually.
| Permanent stupidity can be induced by a relatively a short
| period of sleep deprivation.
| akira2501 wrote:
| The title should be:
|
| "How Bank of America breaks laws."
|
| An editorialized title might be:
|
| "How Bank of America breaks laws for no reason and for tiny
| amounts of actual profit."
| ForOldHack wrote:
| It could not have happened to a nicer bunch of evil ________.
|
| https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/bank-america-profit...
| gumby wrote:
| WSJ of course.
|
| The title is even ambiguous: the same title would work for a
| story about how BofA breaks its internal rules to _prevent_
| dangerous workloads
| adolph wrote:
| "Workload" needs disambiguation. This is about humans working
| long hours in banking, not bypassing security scans on
| containers. I can't remember the last time I heard the word
| "workload" to describe a human.
| potatoball wrote:
| Seems like archive.today can't get full WSJ articles anymore
|
| https://archive.is/slapz
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-08-12 23:02 UTC)