Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by __sr__ 2818 days ago
Because financial sector is run be people who consider engineers a liability[1]. Instead of evolving with time in 80s and 90s as the world moved to modern systems, they clung to their increasingly legacy systems. After all, why would an MBA toting executive from a big bank bother with something as menial as technology? At financial sector firms, Engineers are not meant to be seen or heard. Try proposing a new idea — or a move to a newer system — you’ll be shot down faster than you can say technology — by the same people who have led us from one financial crisis to another in their infinite wisdom.

Most big banks have a bunch of security people whose sole job is to make people’s life hell by spreading as much FUD as possible[2] — that’s what keeps their jobs secure, after all. And they are the only “engineers” who are heard. They make sure that anything new is not adopted till the rest of the world has already started abandoning it.

The primary focus in the technology departments of big banks is to maintain the status quo. New development is rare. New ideas are crushed before they can see the light of the day. As a result, good engineers leave as son as they can and the only ones left behind are the ones who are content living a life of mediocrity — maintaining the status quo.

[1] I know someone who was told something along those lines when they joined a big financial institution as an engineering manager. And not all financial companies work that way. Those who embraced technology reaped the benefits and continue to do so.

[2] I am not suggesting that security is not important. But security people at these institutions take it to a whole different level — to the point where things that should not take more thane a few days end up taking months — if they allow it, that is. Funny how all their objections vanish when someone from upper management asks for the same thing.