Goldman made only 3 market traders, while computer engineers increased to 9 thousand.

category:Internet
 Goldman made only 3 market traders, while computer engineers increased to 9 thousand.


More and more people are paying attention to this phenomenon: will human work be replaced by machine automation in the future? In fact, the story is on the Wall Street. According to overseas media reports, many Wall Street traders are worried that their positions may be replaced by machines in the future, but in one department of Goldman Sachs, this is actually happening. 15 to 20 years ago, 500 of us were making a market for stocks, and now there are only 3 people left. DavidSolomon, chief executive of Goldman Sachs, said recently that introducing new technologies in trading business can serve customers more efficiently. In addition, for Goldman Sachs, the new technology has changed the composition of employees, the bank has 9000 computer engineers. Thanks to artificial intelligence, some traders in Wall Street have been replaced by automation programs. According to market data, the average salary of the employees of 12 large investment banks in the world is 500 thousand dollars, and 75% of Wall Street salaries are paid to these high salary front-end employees. Once these traders are replaced by machines, the salaries they receive will be directly included in the companys profits. There is no doubt that many investment banks are willing to do so if they can save a lot of money for the company. As the representative of artificial intelligence in the financial field, intelligent investment has also attracted the attention of investors. Addepar, an American Fintech venture company, is an intelligent customer service provider to help investment consultants analyze and manage all their customers assets, including hedge funds and private equity. Last year, Addepar completed $140 million in D round financing, hoping to increase investment in platform research and development, while expanding the range of product lines and technology driven financial services. The academic community does not have a unified authoritative definition for intelligent intervention. The American financial industry authority (FINRA) is an official definition of intelligent investment (digitalinvestment), a direct translation of a robot investment consultant, also known as intelligent finance, automation, and so on. In particular, it refers to the use of large data analysis, quantitative financial model and intelligent algorithm, according to the requirements of investors risk bearing level, financial situation, expected income target and investment style preference, using a series of intelligent algorithms, portfolio optimization and other theoretical models to provide intelligence and automation for users. The asset allocation proposal. A.T.Kearney, a consultancy, predicts that smart customers will become mainstream in the next three to five years, with an annual growth rate of 68%, and a more likely asset management of $2 trillion and 200 billion in four years. In China, China Merchants Securities expects that by 2020, the scale of Chinas intelligent investment market assets management can reach 5 trillion and 220 billion yuan. In 2013, a University of Oxford study predicted that technology in the future could replace nearly half of Americans. Although this prediction now seems to be true, many far reaching economists are envisaging strategies. Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft, has said that taxes can be taxed by robots to raise funds and help retraining workers who are replaced by automation. Bill Gates said that if a human worker receives a salary of 50 thousand dollars, his income will be taxed. If robots do the same thing, robots may also be taxed equally. In the education industry, the old-age industry and other industries that need human understanding and empathy, and a large number of labor shortages, the society can raise funds to train those who have been replaced by automatization by levying a tax on robots to get them into these industries. Bill Gates stressed that if people are generally more afraid of innovation than enthusiasm, it is a bad thing, which means that people will not promote the robot to develop in a positive direction. Therefore, taxation is obviously better than prohibiting the development of robots.