= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
MileyCyrus comments on Economy gossip open thread - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (59)
I've done a bit of research on becoming an actuary, and it's not as good as it seems. In the mid 2000's it started appearing on the top of numerous "most desirable jobs" lists, probably thanks to DW Simpson's submarine. People looked at these lists, and some of them tried to become actuaries. But the actuarial field only has 20,000 jobs, so even if only 1000 people decide they want to become actuaries, the entry-level market becomes flooded. Passing two exams used to guarantee a job offer, now it's the bare minimum. Realistically, you won't get an entry-level job without two exams plus two of the following: STEM degree, internship, excellent GPA, programming skills, another 2 exams. Increased competition for entry-level jobs will inevitably lead to lower wages for the new generation of actuaries, just as lawyer salaries fell when lots of people started going to law school.
The job also has a high risk of being Turing'd. There's nothing the exams test that a computer can't do. In fact, the actuaries I've talked to say most of their job is monotonous arithmetic that could be done by a high-schooler. A highly paid, routine, math job is just begging for a computer to take it.
Still, it's a good paying job doesn't require you to go back to school.
ETA: Also, it's not really fair to compare actuarial salaries to other careers that are easier to break into. If you're smart enough to be a 50th percentile actuary, you're smart enough to be a 95th percentile accountant.
So writing actuarial software is probably seriously viable.
But how are you going to write it without becoming an actuary? Or sell it to the insurance giants? (Wouldn't they rather buy their own in-house software, tuned to their idiosyncratic needs? This is probably what is happening with that requirement "programming skills"...)
If it were easy there would already be kickass actuarial software. You might be right that one would need to become an actuary to do it. At least that is the normal path for this sort of thing.
You're correct; most of the software is produced in-house.
I do work for an external consultant firm / software house, and, to be honest a lot of the software is outsourced (which is good, because I like my job as it is). By now, I've got quite a bit of experience in working with one of those insurance giants, and the biggest problem is really the usual "political" one of getting to the right hooks. There is a lot of room for advanced economical models and the related software, and now probably the best choice is to work as a consultant. My suggestion is to look for medium size firms, since the biggest one (e.g Accenture, Ernst&Young) tend to have lower career opportunities, and usually you have to do a lot of boring work as a novice before having the chance to do something more interesting.
Yes, especially if you can do mainframes. (pdf) But then again, mainframe programmers can make good cash anywhere.The 2000 hours required to pass the first four exams are might be better invested developing your coding skills. Especially since some people manage to write actuarial software without actually becoming actuaries.
I wonder how accurate that old '97 transcript is (at least, I hope it was a transcript, errors like "a sequel system" make no sense otherwise).
Also, I loved the line about actuaries not being known for their ability to take risks.