Most active commenters
  • MichaelOldfield(6)
  • mistrial9(3)

←back to thread

Jane Street barred from Indian markets as regulator freezes $566M

(www.cnbc.com)
518 points bwfan123 | 48 comments | 06 Jul 25 14:03 UTC | HN request time: 1.448s | source | bottom
Show context
cs702 ◴[06 Jul 25 20:47 UTC] No.44483909[source]▶
According to Indian regulators, every trading day Jane Street would:

1) buy large volumes of stocks and/or stock futures that are part of an index tracking India’s banking sector, early in the day,

2) subsequently place large options trades, betting that the index would decline or volatility would spike later in the day, and

3) later in the day, cash out of the large long positions, dragging the index lower, making far more money on the options trades than on the long positions.

Jane Street can and likely will claim the firm was only arbitraging away pricing inefficiencies, nothing more, nothing less. It was just business as usual, etc., etc.

However, given the scale of the operation, Jane Street's actions sure look like textbook market manipulation. Calling it like I see it.

replies(22): >>44483959 #>>44484082 #>>44484085 #>>44484194 #>>44484621 #>>44484974 #>>44485377 #>>44485557 #>>44485564 #>>44485830 #>>44485855 #>>44485873 #>>44486444 #>>44487132 #>>44487671 #>>44487911 #>>44487912 #>>44489362 #>>44490126 #>>44492949 #>>44497566 #>>44499330 #
1. Workaccount2 ◴[07 Jul 25 03:20 UTC] No.44486444[source]▶
And this is what some of the brightest minds in the country are being harvested to develop. One of the biggest ongoing travesties.
replies(8): >>44486610 #>>44486961 #>>44486970 #>>44486997 #>>44487361 #>>44488096 #>>44489149 #>>44489896 #
2. Ozzie_osman ◴[07 Jul 25 03:54 UTC] No.44486610[source]▶
Well that and increasing Daily Active Users and ad revenue on social media and video platforms.
replies(1): >>44490543 #
3. noosphr ◴[07 Jul 25 05:13 UTC] No.44486961[source]▶
Luckily, the majority of the brightest minds working on fundamental problems have recently been fired.
4. thierrydamiba ◴[07 Jul 25 05:14 UTC] No.44486970[source]▶
Cash rules everything around me has been the slogan for this generation. Why wouldn’t they chase the biggest dollar?
replies(5): >>44487004 #>>44487024 #>>44487690 #>>44487990 #>>44489761 #
5. fny ◴[07 Jul 25 05:18 UTC] No.44486997[source]▶
Now consider crypto.
replies(3): >>44487007 #>>44487074 #>>44488062 #
6. Avicebron ◴[07 Jul 25 05:20 UTC] No.44487004[source]▶
By this generation please clarify you mean the ones that started this campaign in the 70s, not the subsequent lost generations of people who can barely envision owning a home with a graduate degree in engineering
replies(2): >>44487657 #>>44489865 #
7. jeffrallen ◴[07 Jul 25 05:20 UTC] No.44487007[source]▶
Jane St is probably manipulating crypto too.
8. burnt-resistor ◴[07 Jul 25 05:24 UTC] No.44487024[source]▶
Dollar, dollar bill, y'all.

Those with the power will use it. So much for the "invisible hand" making everything "fair and efficient".

9. penguin_booze ◴[07 Jul 25 05:31 UTC] No.44487074[source]▶
Well, they said 'brightest'; so let's not.
10. globular-toast ◴[07 Jul 25 06:39 UTC] No.44487361[source]▶
Brightest minds in the world from what I can tell. They are particularly sickening in the way they specifically target certain demographics to come and leech for them.

Imagine becoming highly educated and then just using that ability to cream off the output of people who labour every day producing things that are actually useful. The tragedy is all the signals from society are saying this ok. Nobody questions the money. I got excited thinking we would 15 years ago, but nobody cares.

I guess if you're bright enough to come up with a solution you could be like Satoshi, or you could just work for Jane Street and suck as much as you can before you die.

replies(2): >>44487666 #>>44487888 #
11. MichaelOldfield ◴[07 Jul 25 07:36 UTC] No.44487657{3}[source]▶
Come on. How can you not be able to buy a house with an engineering degree? It's one of the best degrees out there.

Define buying a house.

replies(2): >>44488354 #>>44488691 #
12. MichaelOldfield ◴[07 Jul 25 07:38 UTC] No.44487666[source]▶
"I guess if you're bright enough to come up with a solution you could be like Satoshi, or you could just work for Jane Street and suck as much as you can before you die."

the outcome is the same. you're sucking money out of people.

13. immibis ◴[07 Jul 25 07:41 UTC] No.44487690[source]▶
Of course they would. And by doing so, society collapses.

Aligning incentives so that what's good for the individual is also good for society is a politician's job.

14. jddj ◴[07 Jul 25 08:14 UTC] No.44487888[source]▶
> certain demographics

Huh. Interesting point. I guess I never thought about it when JS were the secretive OCAML hacking prop quant fund, but if they become just another use-size-to-win badguy I can see the angle.

15. ozgrakkurt ◴[07 Jul 25 08:29 UTC] No.44487990[source]▶
Because they literally don’t need to, there is so much more in life than money. Current tech culture is garbage in terms of defining success, whole social media is filled with posts defining success as working 24/7, exploiting people around you and making exorbitant amounts of money.

A hardworking and smart person in tech really doesn’t need to try hard or sacrifice much to live a comfortable life in terms of finances. Hard part is the rest of the things in life really.

replies(1): >>44488034 #
16. XajniN ◴[07 Jul 25 08:35 UTC] No.44488034{3}[source]▶
There is so much more in life only if you have money.
17. pjc50 ◴[07 Jul 25 08:38 UTC] No.44488062[source]▶
Much simpler: most of the instruments traded have no fundamental returns, so people can dispense with the pretense of running a real market and go straight to the gambling and manipulation that they want.
18. pas ◴[07 Jul 25 08:42 UTC] No.44488096[source]▶
depends on how you define bright.

people who get stuck in finance - especially trading - are not that bright IMHO compared to the hopelessly curious stubborn ones who go into philosophy or hard sciences or other areas of research.

19. nine_k ◴[07 Jul 25 09:23 UTC] No.44488354{4}[source]▶
For instance, buying a house in Bay Area. Realty around NYC is not very affordable, too. But such places is where the engineering jobs are.
replies(1): >>44488384 #
20. lupusreal ◴[07 Jul 25 09:28 UTC] No.44488384{5}[source]▶
If you get a real engineering degree instead of computer science slop, then your options for where to live and work (without relying on WFH trends going the right way for you) open up substantially.
replies(2): >>44488502 #>>44492714 #
21. MichaelOldfield ◴[07 Jul 25 09:47 UTC] No.44488502{6}[source]▶
a real computer science degree from a good school is a real engineering degree. And you can do a lot of things with it. Pivot quickly.

an "information technology" degree that teaches React and stuff is not engineering.

This is the last website I would imagine people complaining they can't buy a house.

replies(2): >>44488525 #>>44491217 #
22. lupusreal ◴[07 Jul 25 09:53 UTC] No.44488525{7}[source]▶
> an "information technology" degree that teaches React and stuff is not engineering.

Lol, is that really what you think I meant by real engineering? You have tunnel vision for computer tech.

replies(1): >>44492607 #
23. ace32229 ◴[07 Jul 25 10:21 UTC] No.44488691{4}[source]▶
Here in the UK:

Average mechanical engineer salary (mid-career) = £45k Max mortgage based on salary = ~£200k Average house price = ~£292k

-> Most people with an engineering degree cannot buy a house

replies(3): >>44488889 #>>44491408 #>>44492628 #
24. wuiheerfoj ◴[07 Jul 25 10:57 UTC] No.44488889{5}[source]▶
Most people with a mechanical engineering degree cannot buy an _average_ house - not quite the same
replies(1): >>44489074 #
25. Urahandystar ◴[07 Jul 25 11:20 UTC] No.44489074{6}[source]▶
Extrapolating your answer, Most mechanical engineering firms are not in the same areas as the cheap houses. So on your point, most mechanical engineers cannot buy a house that they can live in and get to work.
26. geodel ◴[07 Jul 25 11:28 UTC] No.44489149[source]▶
Exactly, they are just so bright they don't know anything about the world or what are they doing.
27. UncleMeat ◴[07 Jul 25 12:39 UTC] No.44489761[source]▶
The criticism is largely of the system. The mechanism by which capitalism can improve society is by having pay be a incentive to create things that improve society, which people will then choose to purchase.

When the incentive instead rewards "how much money can you extract from others without improving their lives at all" we've headed in a very dangerous direction. You get the "we can make more money by making our product more aggravating" motivation that leads to dark patterns and all sorts of problems.

This sort of market manipulation stuff is just a very clear example of this pattern. Smart people not building useful products but instead fighting to crank a machine so that it spits more money in their direction.

replies(1): >>44489834 #
28. mistrial9 ◴[07 Jul 25 12:48 UTC] No.44489834{3}[source]▶
> Smart people not building useful products

worse, those are the active smart people doing that.. for each one of them there are a hundred others trying to do everything and anything to become one of those.. its a pyramid. The competition between individuals is a feature. You bet it is on the lips of every one of those individuals their "top" credentials that sit them in that trading seat. In other words, for every quant geek on that trading group, there are a thousand other "almost top" people using their time, talent and effort to try to be one of those inner circle ones.

29. mistrial9 ◴[07 Jul 25 12:51 UTC] No.44489865{3}[source]▶
here in the coastal West US, a mid-career policeman does not make enough money to buy a house and have children. A credentialed school teacher does not make enough money to pay RENT in many desirable places, and nowhere near enough to have children of their own and buy a house.
replies(1): >>44491214 #
30. phendrenad2 ◴[07 Jul 25 12:55 UTC] No.44489896[source]▶
This seems like a play on "The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to make people click ads. That sucks." - Jeff Hammerbacher

But is it really? Is buying a lot of stock and selling it later really something that takes a genius?

replies(2): >>44490236 #>>44492260 #
31. yifanl ◴[07 Jul 25 13:33 UTC] No.44490236[source]▶
Doing so in a manner that generates a sufficient amount of profit really does.

And doing so without being caught for market manipulation might require genius that surpasses the human limit.

32. Workaccount2 ◴[07 Jul 25 14:08 UTC] No.44490543[source]▶
But those have a tangible return to society that people flock to. Almost the entirety of Google products is open to anyone on Earth to just open up an use because that ad model is so successful. People click high value ads and it covers to cost of video distribution to anyone with an cell phone and wifi.

Jane street on the other hand is arbitraging against regular folks money, so they can distribute the gains to their select high value clients. There is no free office productivity suite and limitless "How to repair cell phones to start your own business" videos distributed to everyone for free.

In a way, they are doing opposite functions. Ad media takes from people who buy stuff and gives to people who don't (or cant't) buy anything. Jane street and their ilk take from regular people and give to those who have everything already.

replies(1): >>44492804 #
33. datatrashfire ◴[07 Jul 25 15:11 UTC] No.44491214{4}[source]▶
Major city police are typically some of the highest paid public employees of any area. Often with a more generous pension tier than what is given to other public employees. Ie starting pay for SFPD is $115k-$164k https://www.joinsfpd.com/entry-level-program
replies(2): >>44491550 #>>44492148 #
34. vonneumannstan ◴[07 Jul 25 15:11 UTC] No.44491217{7}[source]▶
>This is the last website I would imagine people complaining they can't buy a house.

Even Senior+ level SWEs at FAANG's in Silicon Valley have trouble buying homes there. The costs are absurd.

replies(1): >>44492571 #
35. ralferoo ◴[07 Jul 25 15:31 UTC] No.44491408{5}[source]▶
There are several counter arguments here.

Most people with an engineering degree are probably in a relationship, so they don't need to buy a house on a single salary.

There are plenty of houses for sale below the average price, just as there are plenty above.

Buying isn't necessarily the best option anyway. House price returns in the UK are somewhat below stock market returns, so as a pure investment it doesn't make sense. Unfortunately, we have the narrative in the UK that we should aspire to own houses, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily correct!

replies(1): >>44498095 #
36. Atotalnoob ◴[07 Jul 25 15:45 UTC] No.44491550{5}[source]▶
164k isn’t enough to buy a home in SF.
replies(1): >>44492130 #
37. BobaFloutist ◴[07 Jul 25 16:42 UTC] No.44492130{6}[source]▶
starting pay.

Also, it's 164k a year, not ever. So whether or not it can buy a home in SF kind of depends on how long and how fast you save.

38. mistrial9 ◴[07 Jul 25 16:45 UTC] No.44492148{5}[source]▶
you cited the top of the range, in the highest paying city in the West.. its not enough to buy a house there.
39. freejazz ◴[07 Jul 25 16:54 UTC] No.44492260[source]▶
Ask Jane Street, not the poster.
40. MichaelOldfield ◴[07 Jul 25 17:23 UTC] No.44492571{8}[source]▶
I guarantee you, it's harder in 90% of places in the world (accounting for buying power/price of real estate). You guys don't understand our privilege.

You can buy an f'ing house. In places like Ukraine people make $100/month and apartments are $50k(and I'm talking before the war). There, it's LITERALLY impossible.

What people here are describing is that things should be better, and I agree, but words matter.

replies(1): >>44493402 #
41. MichaelOldfield ◴[07 Jul 25 17:25 UTC] No.44492607{8}[source]▶
i don't know cause there's a ton of nonsense here so explain what you meant. and also what not being able to buy a house means.
42. MichaelOldfield ◴[07 Jul 25 17:27 UTC] No.44492628{5}[source]▶
That means you can buy a house a little below average. With a spouse straight up can.
43. MrMorden ◴[07 Jul 25 17:34 UTC] No.44492714{6}[source]▶
CS is a real degree, but it's more math than engineering. CS and engineering have nothing in common beyond math and physics prerequisites.
44. objektif ◴[07 Jul 25 17:43 UTC] No.44492804{3}[source]▶
Your "ad" people are rotting the brains of entire generations by addicting kids using many different tactics (insta, YouTube shorts, TikTok....) . Please spare us the moral judgement.
replies(1): >>44493296 #
45. dmonitor ◴[07 Jul 25 18:30 UTC] No.44493296{4}[source]▶
"brain rot" is a subjective criticism. objectively speaking, the kids are making art and sharing it with each other. it's at worst an extension of the entertainment industry. you can not like the art, but it's at least art.

the finance industry doesn't produce anything of value. it just turns $1 into $2 and liquidates productive industries.

46. nine_k ◴[07 Jul 25 18:41 UTC] No.44493402{9}[source]▶
Google tells us:

In 2021, the median annual salary for software engineers in Ukraine ranged from $30,000 to $48,175, depending on location and experience. Some specific figures include $30,000 in Kyiv, $29,000 in Lviv, and $24,000 in Kharkiv. Remote software engineers in Ukraine had a median salary of $48,175.

It's quite below the EU median, but definitely not $100 a day.

BTW $100 a day is $12.50 a hour, which is more than the federal minimum wage in the US ($7.50 or so), and only $4 below California's minimum wage, $16.50.

47. Peritract ◴[08 Jul 25 08:13 UTC] No.44498095{6}[source]▶
> Most people with an engineering degree are probably in a relationship

This doesn't feel like a valid assumption.

replies(1): >>44498418 #
48. ralferoo ◴[08 Jul 25 09:24 UTC] No.44498418{7}[source]▶
Over half the UK adult population is married. According to the ONS, 61% of the population aged 16 or above is living with a partner. [1]

Unless the demographics of those with engineering degrees is significantly skewed towards singles, this feels like a very valid assumption. Of course, you might have access to better statistics by profession.

[1] https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populati...