[logotype]

I work in finance. About 5 years ago I started building a FIX library on my spare time, out of curiosity. Over the years it has been countless fin tech start-ups as well as big companies reaching out to me about the library, suggesting fixes and features. Since then I have long lost the interest in the technology which enables connectivity to financial exchanges to automate trades, but I keep working on the library for the benefit of others and just the joy of creating something. But what’s the actual impact? Enabling companies getting richer? Greed?

https://gitlab.com/logotype/fixparser

[satellite2]

I've been a user of your project and it's fantastic. I think you're being too hard on yourself.

The proliferation of marketplaces and assets to trade (and all type of projects, automated trading, market making, etc... that your project enabled) can been seen as a net positive, as a win win for all parties involved and more.

From a microeconomic perspective, your library enabled access to startup using js and with relatively simple tech stacks access to a tool that would otherwise be relatively complicated and time consuming and for which they would not necessary have the resouces. By doing so you lowered the cost of entry and allowed new entrants to challenge the status quo.

And from a macroeconomic perspective I think it's one of the reason access to capital has been simplified and has lowered in cost, it's one of the reason for the low cost of mortgages and the relative resilience of economies during covid (central banks interventions are useless without bank and other financial intermediaries participation, it would be like pushing on a string).

Don't be fooled by the contemporary contempt against finance. It's still the most important reason that explain the constant improvmements in prosperity and peace of recent years, and the best thing one can do is to make it less arcane and open it to more people. One of the achievements of your tool.

You can be proud of your work.

[nicoburns]

> Don't be fooled by the contemporary contempt against finance. It's still the most important reason that explain the constant improvmements in prosperity and peace of recent years

I think the contempt comes from the fact that financial instruments have a tendency to concentrate those benefits in small proportion of the population. Low-cost mortgages are an excellent example: these have enabled wealth gain for those who were able to get them at a certain time. But that gain has come almost entirely at the expense of those who weren't able to (or simply didn't) get them, who now face greatly increased rent and house prices.

[lazide]

It isn’t financial instruments doing that - it’s people.

Be thankful that it allows this to happen somewhat transparently and peacefully, rather than at the hands of pinkertons, criminals, or the military - which is how historically it has happened.

[nicoburns]

The financial instruments (and the underlying rules of the economic system) are the enablers here. You're probably right that it's probably better than what came before, but that doesn't mean we can improve on the system we have.

[lazide]

Of course we can improve it - by identifying where people’s behaviors and systemic effects are causing undesirable behaviors. That probably doesn’t happen if we blame ‘finance’ for it though?

Every system has exploitable loopholes and will become unbalanced once enough people start gaming it. Some of them (especially new ones) are easier than others.

It’s easy to say ‘this is terrible’, but that can easily turn into rejecting a known system with adjustments and corrections for bad behaviors that isn’t perfect into a system that gets gamed even easier by bad actors and turns into an even worse (but different) mess. See 90% of all revolutions ever.

[CRConrad]

Judging from how utterly close that was to a well-worn idiom, I'm guessing what the GP meant to write was "that doesn't mean we can't improve..."

Just so you guys don't get into violent agreement.

[andrepd]

> It isn’t X doing that - it’s people.

That's quite a silly argument since you can very literally replace X by anything and get a true statement.

[lazide]

Definitely not true.

Wildfire burns down your house (assuming no intentional negligence?) - fire burned down your house.

Tsunami happens and wipes out your village? That was a tsunami, not people.

Neighboring countries army invades? Yeah, that’s people.

[andrepd]

Anything man-made, as should be obvious.

Example: It isn't democracy doing that, just people. It isn't autocracy doing that, just people. It isn't socialism doing that, it's people. It isn't capitalism doing that, it's people.

Therefore democracy = dictatorship, and socialism = capitalism. It's all the same, it's all people in the end, so it's no matter.

Patently absurd.

[andrepd]

The financial services industry is focused on helping those with the most wealth accumulate even more wealth. You can try to spin this any way you'd like, but this is their raison d'être, it's the business they're in. Don't try to pretend they're actually helping us all, especially after 2008 has revealed their true nature to the wider public.

All you're saying would be correct if we had a sane system of property rights, (which we don't); then finance would be truly benefiting everyone. But that's not the world we live in.

[lmm]

> The financial services industry is focused on helping those with the most wealth accumulate even more wealth.

Every business is focused on making money, and that usually means serving the people with the most money because, well, they have the most money.

> Don't try to pretend they're actually helping us all, especially after 2008 has revealed their true nature to the wider public.

2008, where it became clear that the banks had screwed over their wealthy investors (and each other) to help chumps get mortgages they couldn't afford? How does that show what you're claiming it shows?

[nicoffeine]

> (central banks interventions are useless without bank and other financial intermediaries participation, it would be like pushing on a string).

Yes, the only thing financial intermediaries would be missing is the actual funds (largely paid by the middle class) to bail out corporations for the second time in less than twenty years.

> Don't be fooled by the contemporary contempt against finance.

There has been contempt for greed and corruption for a long time, and for the same reasons that finance continues to earn it today. If the middle class didn’t constantly bail out the banks and their related parasites, you would all be bankrupt.

Frankly I don’t want to hear any advice from anyone in the financial industry until you demonstrate the ability to pay taxes and save enough to make it through the next crisis without crawling to the capitol building with your hand out.

[lazide]

Pretty sure you’re blaming the wrong people. I’m not now and have never been in finance - but blaming banks or traders for the Fed’s actions is prima facia ridiculous.

And throwing in the whole ‘greed is good’ stereotype doesn’t help.

[nicoffeine]

Did the fed lobby for the end of regulations and then immediately tank the world economy with a pyramid scheme?

Blaming the fed for the bailout is like blaming firefighters for putting out a fire instead of the arsonist. That’s a pretty strange understanding of accountability.

While the world economy burned to the ground and families went hungry, the financial industry awarded their executives with billions of dollars in bonuses. If that isn’t greed, what is it?

[lazide]

Which ones exactly and how did they pull off this apparent massive conspiracy?

Near as I can tell, Greenspan pumping trillions of near free credit into the economy is nearly if not more culpable than the loose underwriting at these banks - after all, if they didn’t loosen them, they’d lose their market share in near free credit environments.

And what about the borrowers that were signing up for these completely unrealistic loans? How do they fit in?

And the poor bastards bidding crazy amounts trying to get a house, any house, and also way overpaying in any real sense because of these crazy bidding wars?

It’s easy to blame amorphous entities, it’s hard to really nail down what was actually happening - and point out that everyone in the US was playing a part in a spiraling out of control mess.

[nicoffeine]

> Which ones exactly and how did they pull off this apparent massive conspiracy?

Most of those details are in the findings of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission [1]:

"More than 30 years of deregulation and reliance on self-regulation by financial institutions, championed by former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan and others, supported by successive administrations and Congresses, and actively pushed by the powerful financial industry at every turn, had stripped away key safeguards, which could have helped avoid catastrophe. This approach had opened up gaps in oversight of critical areas with trillions of dollars at risk, such as the shadow banking system and over-the-counter derivatives markets. In addition, the government permitted financial firms to pick their preferred regulators in what became a race to the weakest supervisor."

...

"In the years leading up to the crisis, too many financial institutions, as well as too many households, borrowed to the hilt. ... [A]s of 2007, the leverage ratios [of the five major investment banks] were as high as 40 to 1, meaning for every $40 in assets, there was only $1 in capital to cover losses. Less than a 3% drop in asset values could wipe out a firm. To make matters worse, much of their borrowing was short-term, in the overnight market—meaning the borrowing had to be renewed each and every day. ... And the leverage was often hidden—in derivatives positions, in off-balance-sheet entities, and through "window dressing" of financial reports available to the investing public. ... The heavy debt taken on by some financial institutions was exacerbated by the risky assets they were acquiring with that debt. As the mortgage and real estate markets churned out riskier and riskier loans and securities, many financial institutions loaded up on them."

...

> Near as I can tell, Greenspan pumping trillions of near free credit into the economy is nearly if not more culpable than the loose underwriting at these banks - after all, if they didn’t loosen them, they’d lose their market share in near free credit environments.

None of the firms told Greenspan to stop. They pushed for more and more deregulations and continued to take the money.

> And what about the borrowers that were signing up for these completely unrealistic loans? How do they fit in?

> It’s easy to blame amorphous entities, it’s hard to really nail down what was actually happening - and point out that everyone in the US was playing a part in a spiraling out of control mess.

No, it's pretty well documented. Calling the financial industry "amorphous entities" is... well, just kind of humorous. It's your choice whether to hold the industry that spent decades eliminating regulations for themselves accountable, or the people the industry took advantage of once they were free of oversight.

In line with your argument, if our financial elite don't know more about finance than everyday citizens (why else hold them equally accountable), and they're too incompetent to regulate themselves (else they would have corrected the Fed's behavior), what is their purpose? Wouldn't it be cheaper for everyone if we gave practically interest free money directly to businesses that produce actual goods and services?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_Crisis_Inquiry_Commi...

[krageon]

The financial industry is a necessary evil because our entire financial system is so fucked up. I recognise that a certain amount of cognitive dissonance is required if you work in the industry, but I think saying it is a primary driver for social improvement is really taking that way too far.

That said, if you write cool software that is cool. It doesn't need to have a huge social impact as long as you enjoy creating it, which appears to be the case here :)

[logotype]

Thank you!

[jjeaff]

There is a common refrain in charitable organizations that are focused on helping the poor:

"Sometimes you have to feed the greedy to get to the truly needy."

In other words, the greedy will always take advantage, but that doesn't diminish the help you give to the needy. There is simply no way to totally filter for the greedy.

This doesn't really apply directly to your situation, but at least for every greedy company that benefits from free products like yours, there are a lot of jobs created and benefit to society as a whole when these companies create useful products.

[cortesoft]

I do find this aspect of human morality interesting... people get REALLY upset at freeloaders, to a degree that is not proportionate to the cost they add. We choose to spend a ton of resources to prevent freeloading, even when the amount we spend to stop them is more than we actually lose to the freeloaders.

I guess it kinda makes sense as social creatures, but it can be frustrating at times when you are trying to help people.

[petschge]

> We choose to spend a ton of resources to prevent freeloading, even when the amount we spend to stop them is more than we actually lose to the freeloaders.

Is it also more than what we would lose to freeloaders if we did nothing against them? If yes, then it's indeed not rational. But if no, then it's just indicative that what we are doing is working.

[cortesoft]

Yeah, that is part of why I said it was interesting… it is hard to figure out how important that behavior is for social stability.

[Aeolun]

I imagine if we stopped doing those things the number of freeloaders would increase.

So the net benefit is negative now, but it’s still better than the cost of not having the measures at all.

Also, yeah, it shouldn’t be easy to freeload. Make them work for it!

[sgc]

Your comment made me chuckle because it started "I imagine" and then reached a "so" as a "therefore".

Virtually every time you integrate anti-freeloading measures, everyone pays the price to catch a relatively small minority of people abusing the system. It does not at all follow without study that the suffering these measures cause are better than the alternative of allowing some level of growth in the abuse of the system to make everyone else's lives easier.

Every organization should do its own studies and reach conclusions based on what actually happens in its domain and location of operation. Anything else is likely harming people and more drum beating than solid work.

[AbrahamParangi]

The null hypothesis is that parasite load will increase until the organism can no longer bear it. Freeloading will increase to the point of institutional collapse. Both people and systems need immune systems to survive.

[Aeolun]

> Anything else is likely harming people and more drum beating than solid work.

I don’t necessarily disagree. But I think people are happier while being harmed by the measures than by the freeloaders.

[alien_]

I'd probably offer some sort of support/consultancy services and prioritize the work of the paying users, making it clear when filing github issues and pull requests. This could easily sustain you in a passive income way so you can spend most of your time working on things that matter more to humanity.

[eloff]

Yeah, I think especially in finance companies would be willing to pay for support and feature development. There has to be a way to monetize the project and make it so at least it pays for your time.

There's nothing wrong with a labor of love, but the companies using your software can afford to pay for your time.

[kilroy123]

But then it's a job and he/she probably won't like it anymore.

[alien_]

That's okay, it doesn't need to be a full-time job, but more like a "4 hour work week" mini-job that pays the bills with minimal ongoing effort.

The rest of the time could be spent doing other more interesting things that just bring joy and/or benefit humankind.

They'll probably also have further potential for monetization, and so on, sustaining a life of leisure and doing meaningful work.

[bigyikes]

I don’t think you have any obligation to continue supporting the software, but give yourself more credit! You’re making dozens (hundreds? thousands?) of developers lives significantly better. You’re helping bring the finance industry out of the stone age. You’ve created something useful and valuable, which is no small feat.

[hdudhdhd]

Isn't FIX messaging part of the stone age problem?

[bigyikes]

Well, baby steps and all that :^)

At least it’s not a hand-rolled, “enterprise-grade” (read: extremely verbose with unnecessary abstractions) pile of spaghetti. I’m slightly scarred from my brief stint at a large finance firm.

[mech4bg]

This is amazing. I now work in consumer SAAS web development, but I worked for a long time in finance and for 7 years of that exclusively focused on FIX, writing a real-time, highly performant market interface. I would have _loved_ to have had something like this while I was working on it. Have you thought of commercializing it? Do you get to use it in your day-to-day work?

[boulos]

Huh! You left out the most funky part: you wrote a FIX parser in Typescript.

What are people using it for? To make web apps and just not have to roll their own wrappers around FIX/FIX-derived data? (That is, if all back ends are used to speaking FIX, it’s nicer to have the front end and web serving tools also just speak it?).

[true_religion]

People use nodejs in finance backends too. Its async operators make it easy to munge different data streams together and fan in/out results.

[vmception]

oh this is something to say louder for the people in the back: there is no reason that finance and computational finance gravitated around python

there is nothing inherent about that language aside from people not having made some libraries in other languages

javascript especially nodejs is fine for most people's finance cases

[nuclearnice3]

It's true there is nothing inherent. Because all these non-statically typed garbage collected languages with Algol-like syntax are basically the same language. Given that it makes sense that the decision is made based on libraries, community, inertia and whim.

[lmm]

> Huh! You left out the most funky part: you wrote a FIX parser in Typescript.

What's odd about that? Typescript is a boring middle-of-the-road language from the last ~10 years, it's a pretty reasonable default language (although structural typing is a bad default if you ask me).

[CydeWeys]

Are your users compensating you well for this? Sounds like the impact you're having is making fintech serious money, so I hope you're getting some of that.

[logotype]

0 USD :)

[agumonkey]

I'm trying to find niches where positive feedback loops have a nicer effect on society (right now trying to help courthouse daily duties for instance)

[akudha]

It would be nice to make a list of such niches. Things that wouldn’t take more than a couple of hundred hours to make (at max) and are tremendously useful, especially to vulnerable populations like old people, people with limited internet connection, physically challenged people etc.

These need not be super polished, optimized etc. They just need to work correctly and solve a problem quickly and easily

[agumonkey]

old people are a special demographics (I encounter a few of them regularly, for IT reasons or not)

the obvious fields in the list:

- education

- healthcare

- justice

someone on HN showed an app for people to find good workers for home rework, this kind of stuff could be tremendously useful, and more generally the organization layer of society is very lacking. This also match the issues at the courthouse, basically making people well informed, and communicating issues/info smoothly (instead of waiting days to get a fake answer by someone shady)

[akudha]

Physically challenged people are another group that could use a lot of help. One of my friends has cerebral palsy, until I met her, I had zero idea about the problems they face.

These groups of people aren’t served because there is not much money in it :(

[agumonkey]

I'd gladly help people with those issues. I'm gonna seek them (no idea why I never thought about that).

The reason I put elders aside is that their motivations and emotions are very different from younger people. There are lot of fear, loneliness driving their need for help, and often they don't really want to own the knowledge, it's more a little bit of emotional support; which is cool, but not as motivating as, say, a younger handicapped person, who has more skin in the game.

[akudha]

There was a language website that connected old people with youngsters who want to learn languages. They practice their language skills and help the old people with loneliness. This is a very good idea.

[alien_]

There's a lot to be done to address digital divide especially for the elderly.

The other week I witnessed first hand how multiple 50-something folks who own smartphones struggled with something as easy as filling a form on a website for making an appointment (in this case for getting a passport) and confirming the appointment by clicking an email.

Or think about the thousands of vulnerable/old people who will die of COVID-19 because they failed to schedule their vaccinations even though they could otherwise access it. A friend who works in Berlin on radiotherapy for cancer patients said lots of them aren't vaccinated because they just can't sign up for it and their doctor doesn't do it for them.

Anything that requires using technology, even as simple as using a browser and getting a confirmation email should be probably be also made available by more familiar/accessible tools such as SMS/whatsapp/facebook or a call center.

[agumonkey]

biggest problem in digital anything is the amount of bs and randomness

non tech saavy people rely on rote learning at surface layers, and every year comes a new way, new look, new lingo .. they feel it's yet another big knowledge gap to learn when in fact there's almost nothing new under the sun (algorithms are as old as civilisation, logic doesn't change much)

[qmmmur]

Are you seriously asking that question about people who want to automate trading in the stock market?

[high_byte]

if you want to erase billions and stop the richness just remove the library, or better yet add a typo :D