n****e
发帖数: 629 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 Statistics 讨论区 】
发信人: chjymitbbs (chjymintbbs), 信区: Statistics
标 题: Re: model validation 工作前景如何？
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Aug 14 10:57:31 2014, 美东)
LOL. Sounds like you've been through a lot...
Seriously, not a bad place to start. Exposure to almost every aspect of bank
's function. Don't expect to gain deep understanding of any model through
validation work though. You are on your own if you really want to be an
expert on something. Be prepared to have constant confrontations with a lot
of people. LOB usually knows more than you do about the model's real
application, what you think is a big deal may mean nothing to them. And no
one likes to be picked upon, human nature. Part of your job to deal with it.
Lay low and just do whatever your boss told you to do, keep him/her updated
on your progress all the time. Cover your own back, you should be fine.
MV hold the upper hand in corporate power struggle now, and they are booming
. Although I think they are on a losing steak and will fade away in a few
years. Who cares, as long as you are paid good money and have something to
add to your resume.
A lot of Chinese work in this field. Really hope they can hire more Chinese
and spread out throughout the bank later. Good luck. | n****e
发帖数: 629 | 2 要考虑MV工作的请细读此帖
bank
lot
【在 n****e 的大作中提到】
: 【 以下文字转载自 Statistics 讨论区 】
: 发信人: chjymitbbs (chjymintbbs), 信区: Statistics
: 标 题: Re: model validation 工作前景如何？
: 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Aug 14 10:57:31 2014, 美东)
: LOL. Sounds like you've been through a lot...
: Seriously, not a bad place to start. Exposure to almost every aspect of bank
: 's function. Don't expect to gain deep understanding of any model through
: validation work though. You are on your own if you really want to be an
: expert on something. Be prepared to have constant confrontations with a lot
: of people. LOB usually knows more than you do about the model's real
| r**a
发帖数: 536 | 3 这个帖子里面说的东西并不全是对的。比如，“Don't expect to gain deep
understanding of any model through validation work though. You are on your
own if you really want to be an expert on something. Be prepared to have
constant confrontations with a lot of people.” 这个真的要分情况。像我所在的
组，front office用的trading model我们需要从细节(数学推导和具体的
implementation)上全部掌握，而且要提出一些合
理的建议和意见。FO quant也是人，是人就会犯错，就会有想不到的东西。我们组曾经
枪毙过FO的一些很差的模型。模型本身如果只是用来pricing，那问题不大。但是前台
的模型除了用来pricing之外还要算risk的。像我们枪毙的模型就是因为risk number算
得太差太不稳定了。而且FO往往迫于时间的压力该做的test没有时间去做。
一般来说，MV可以做的非常high level, 这样的话作为validator来说确实学不到什么
东西。但是也可以做的非常lower level。这个真的是case by case. 不是所有的银行
的MV都只是个摆设。
bank
lot
【在 n****e 的大作中提到】
: 要考虑MV工作的请细读此帖
:
: bank
: lot
| n****e
发帖数: 629 | 4 说明他对deep understanding的理解可能和您不同……
您做pricing model的？其实现在做risk model的MV可能更多些。这篇里没有怎么提。
我有很多槽但是懒得吐了……
枪毙个只有5个position的小model当然没啥，还可以拿来当政绩。你把swap给枪毙了试
试，看看前台会不会来找你拼命。
【在 r**a 的大作中提到】
: 这个帖子里面说的东西并不全是对的。比如，“Don't expect to gain deep
: understanding of any model through validation work though. You are on your
: own if you really want to be an expert on something. Be prepared to have
: constant confrontations with a lot of people.” 这个真的要分情况。像我所在的
: 组，front office用的trading model我们需要从细节(数学推导和具体的
: implementation)上全部掌握，而且要提出一些合
: 理的建议和意见。FO quant也是人，是人就会犯错，就会有想不到的东西。我们组曾经
: 枪毙过FO的一些很差的模型。模型本身如果只是用来pricing，那问题不大。但是前台
: 的模型除了用来pricing之外还要算risk的。像我们枪毙的模型就是因为risk number算
: 得太差太不稳定了。而且FO往往迫于时间的压力该做的test没有时间去做。
| r**a
发帖数: 536 | 5
这个当然了。常见的instrument pricing model如果错了的话，那么FO quant可以集体
被枪毙了。另外，有些大模型比如LMM，有些时候有些东西我们也会打回去让他们重做
。当然，这些model大的方向不会错，关键是有些小细节前台有时候做的确实不够。
【在 n****e 的大作中提到】
: 说明他对deep understanding的理解可能和您不同……
: 您做pricing model的？其实现在做risk model的MV可能更多些。这篇里没有怎么提。
: 我有很多槽但是懒得吐了……
: 枪毙个只有5个position的小model当然没啥，还可以拿来当政绩。你把swap给枪毙了试
: 试，看看前台会不会来找你拼命。
| l**********e
发帖数: 336 | 6 interesting post, mark
we should have more discussion like this!
【在 r**a 的大作中提到】
: 这个帖子里面说的东西并不全是对的。比如，“Don't expect to gain deep
: understanding of any model through validation work though. You are on your
: own if you really want to be an expert on something. Be prepared to have
: constant confrontations with a lot of people.” 这个真的要分情况。像我所在的
: 组，front office用的trading model我们需要从细节(数学推导和具体的
: implementation)上全部掌握，而且要提出一些合
: 理的建议和意见。FO quant也是人，是人就会犯错，就会有想不到的东西。我们组曾经
: 枪毙过FO的一些很差的模型。模型本身如果只是用来pricing，那问题不大。但是前台
: 的模型除了用来pricing之外还要算risk的。像我们枪毙的模型就是因为risk number算
: 得太差太不稳定了。而且FO往往迫于时间的压力该做的test没有时间去做。
| x********o
发帖数: 519 | 7 FO quant won't tell you all critical details especially those in
implementation. the rule is do not ask, do not tell. reason is very simple,
if he tells you more, there will be more requests/restrictions from MV guys
secondly, even if you know the so called details, it does not mean you
really understand the model. I guess most people would say they know C++,
but how many of them are really the experts. | l**********e
发帖数: 336 | 8 yes, the relationship is complicated
,
guys
【在 x********o 的大作中提到】
: FO quant won't tell you all critical details especially those in
: implementation. the rule is do not ask, do not tell. reason is very simple,
: if he tells you more, there will be more requests/restrictions from MV guys
: secondly, even if you know the so called details, it does not mean you
: really understand the model. I guess most people would say they know C++,
: but how many of them are really the experts.
| r**a
发帖数: 536 | 9 this is true. So normally we have to think the model from both model
developer's and risk manager's viewpoint. Basically, this means that we have
to build the model (math derivation and implementation) from the very
beginning. This is so-called independent check. Furthermore, I do not think
it is a good thing if FO quant tells all the details, because it will limit
your view. You know, different people have different idea. If you know other
guys' idea exactly, it is very easy to confine your idea, which is not good.
As a FO quant, from my understanding, ideally when you build a model, you
have to do some research on the model itself and some other similar models
too, but due to lack of time, sometime FO quant does not have time to do
this kind research deeply, especially comparing the one you want to build
with others. Thus, comparing the submitted model with other models becomes
part of MV job duty, e.g., for some FX model, people sometimes want to use
LV model, but as a MV guy, you have to think if a SV model is used, what
will happen? Of course, after calibration, the price will get compensated.
But the risk numbers are probably different. As a MV guy, you have to think
in this way. I do not know what other MV team does, but in my team, we
indeed follow this principle and already got respect and appreciation from
FO quant team.
However, every coin has two sides. As a MV guy, the bad thing is that we
does not work with trader, which means that we cannot understand market so
deep as a FO quant and also the money earned is less. The good thing is that
normally our work is not so dirty as FO quant. The model submitted to MV
team is normally neat.
,
guys
【在 x********o 的大作中提到】
: FO quant won't tell you all critical details especially those in
: implementation. the rule is do not ask, do not tell. reason is very simple,
: if he tells you more, there will be more requests/restrictions from MV guys
: secondly, even if you know the so called details, it does not mean you
: really understand the model. I guess most people would say they know C++,
: but how many of them are really the experts.
| c********s
发帖数: 101 | 10 Interesting my post provoked a discussion around MV. Here is another of my
posts. When someone working in MV ask about difficulties in work, I replied
this. Just add to the discussion for fun. Someday I will dig a "Keng" about
MV, so many things to say, feels like they want to burst out of me...Maybe
when my boss is on vacation next week. BTW, we used out every single day of
our vacation. Last time I checked, the bank is still functioning...guess we
are not as important/successful as manager Liu.
My reply is only applicable to new recruits, or someone lower level like me
(quote: "bottom of the food chain"). If you are in a position to determine
the direction of your MV department, go ahead fight for your territory,
ignore my words. Oh, need to get back to work now, my boss does not count my
minutes on toilet, but I think he will still get pissed if I stay on BBS
all day.
发信人: chjymitbbs (chjymintbbs), 信区: Statistics
标 题: Re: 我工作中的致命弱点，求真心指教!! (转载)
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Wed Aug 13 15:27:06 2014, 美东)
Just don't take yourself too seriously. Lay low so you wouldn't get blamed.
LOB model may be crappy, but they exist for a reason. LOB modeler has a lot
of people to please other than you, and he may face tech problems you are
not aware of. Any of your suggestions will be extra burden for him. He
naturally hates you. Don't take it personally. This tension is purposely
designed by the regulators. Let your boss handle it.
If you are not extremely experienced in the business yourself, and you know
the right people, don't even try to be a big hero. MV always wants to
believe they are helping LOB, but the sad fact is, bank hires you to get
regulators off its back, not really to improve LOB model. Usually you are
not even talking to the LOB decision makers. Imagine a business unit leader
who has used a model for 20 years, has trusted people to consult with model
output. They use the jargon you don't understand, and they don't understand
any math/ statistics terminology you use. Where does MV fit in? Stick to
documenting the short-comes, what LOB do with your suggestion is not your
problem.
In banks, MV unit may shrink and fade away eventually, when regulators are
under less pressure from the congress, so banks get less pressure from
regulators. Exactly as cyberpassby said, "Compliance is changing all the
time but business will stay forever".
There are quite a few people here already gave you very good advice. I just
want to add this: spend more time with family, or, if you are single, find a
hobby to occupy your spare time. When you are less stressful, you are more
likely to act more friendly/positively and things just might turned out to
be best for everyone. Good Luck. | | | w********e
发帖数: 944 | 11 chjymitbbs, you are so naughty! But I like the discussion you have initiated
here. Thanks. | n****e
发帖数: 629 | 12 您太Nb了，把我想说的话全说了，lol
看来我没有必要写那个一直懒得写的长帖了
有空吃个饭吧，lol
replied
about
of
we
me
【在 c********s 的大作中提到】
: Interesting my post provoked a discussion around MV. Here is another of my
: posts. When someone working in MV ask about difficulties in work, I replied
: this. Just add to the discussion for fun. Someday I will dig a "Keng" about
: MV, so many things to say, feels like they want to burst out of me...Maybe
: when my boss is on vacation next week. BTW, we used out every single day of
: our vacation. Last time I checked, the bank is still functioning...guess we
: are not as important/successful as manager Liu.
: My reply is only applicable to new recruits, or someone lower level like me
: (quote: "bottom of the food chain"). If you are in a position to determine
: the direction of your MV department, go ahead fight for your territory,
| r**a
发帖数: 536 | 13 This is a good post. I totally agree with you. Actually in my previous posts
I should emphasize that the MV team is normally doing the supportive thing.
As a MV guy you are normally far away from the decision maker. So, even you
found a better model than the submitted one, it is not you who will decide
which model should be used. But as part of the job duty, you need to make
some comments on what you found and let the decision maker choose. For me I
believe that ideally a good model validator should have deep understanding
for the models the business is using and have ability to make further
suggestions. But also need to aware that whether your suggestion will be
taken is not your business.
Regarding if the MV is interesting or not, it is case by case, dependent of
personal interests and bank structure, etc. For example, if your background
is very theoretical and like a relative neat model in stead of doing some
dirty work, the MV is prob a good start. Actually the original point I want
to make in my initial post is that as a MV guy, you may have chance to learn
a lot of things depending on the team, bank, etc.
Regarding the regulation thing, I agree that the MV team will shrink if the
regulation is relaxed in the future. So here I more like to suggest that the
newbie should select jobs where you can learn lots of things.
replied
about
of
we
me
【在 c********s 的大作中提到】
: Interesting my post provoked a discussion around MV. Here is another of my
: posts. When someone working in MV ask about difficulties in work, I replied
: this. Just add to the discussion for fun. Someday I will dig a "Keng" about
: MV, so many things to say, feels like they want to burst out of me...Maybe
: when my boss is on vacation next week. BTW, we used out every single day of
: our vacation. Last time I checked, the bank is still functioning...guess we
: are not as important/successful as manager Liu.
: My reply is only applicable to new recruits, or someone lower level like me
: (quote: "bottom of the food chain"). If you are in a position to determine
: the direction of your MV department, go ahead fight for your territory,
| n****e
发帖数: 629 | 14 hehe其实还是可以有人再补充下risk model validation的
totally different kind of story
【在 n****e 的大作中提到】
: 您太Nb了，把我想说的话全说了，lol
: 看来我没有必要写那个一直懒得写的长帖了
: 有空吃个饭吧，lol
:
: replied
: about
: of
: we
: me
| A*******s
发帖数: 3942 | 15 i think risk model validation should be quite stable,
when econ is up, banks don't have incentives to laid off ppl
when econ is down, banks need more MV due to regulation pressure
【在 n****e 的大作中提到】
: hehe其实还是可以有人再补充下risk model validation的
: totally different kind of story
| c********s
发帖数: 101 | 16 oh, boy, how can I resist such good joking material:)
You see, I can have a good sense of humor even though I am not "authentic
white".
initiated
【在 w********e 的大作中提到】
: chjymitbbs, you are so naughty! But I like the discussion you have initiated
: here. Thanks.
| w********e
发帖数: 944 | 17 bad boy, chjymitbbs. please do behave yourself. LOL. | c********s
发帖数: 101 | 18 Some of my thoughts, bias because it's from the receiving end of MV. And
situations must be different at different banks. I will delete this post
after several days-- too much said. And if you get a sense who I am, just
stop guessing. I am nobody, way down at the "bottom of the food chain" (
Sorry, cannot help it, I am hopeless).
The booming of MV represent a paradox posted by regulators. They demand
banks to have a bigger centralized MV division after the crisis. This demand
is not coming bottom-up from the business. So, no matter what MV wants to
believe, their existence/booming is not coming from direct business needs.
As a result, in essence, they work for the regulators. It's a paradox
because bank is paying the expense. And, boy, it's not cheap. Not only the
headcounts, but also indirect cost of holding up other big projects.
It's kind of dangerous for MV because bank views it as a pure cost. No one
would want to say it out aloud. But in small talks people can hear this
among bank's executives. I once over heard our CRO told my boss in plain
language:"we don't work for the regulators, they are not our friends. Be
honest with them but don't volunteer any information". Since MV serve as the
extension of regulators, same attitude will extend to them. No matter in
public how these executives praise MV and encourage them to look into every
aspect of the bank. Their true thought is :"just take these money and get
the
regulators off my back, don't bother me with other things".
Not that big a concern now for the Chinese working in MV, you will still
have several good years. A lot of things can happen in a few years, you are
not in any more danger than guys work in other fields. I just have a few
suggestions. For managers, if you can, grab some job functions that work
direct with business, let them depend on you for something. It's going to be
a tough fight, but worth the effort. For people at the "bottom of the food
chain" (I am slapping myself, I just cannot hold myself quoting this), chill
out a little, don't try to be a big hero, it's not your fight. Don't act
too tense, you will exhaust yourself and people around you. Learn as much as
you can; build your own connections.
Haven't typed this many words since my last MV documentation:), really
should stop now...Good Luck to all. | t********t
发帖数: 1264 | 19 Sooner or later the bank will find that a model validation team can handle
most of the FO quant job, with less cost and more expertise and efficiency.
Especially nowadays mv team is building their own independent library. I did
see some banks let go all the FO quants and keep some of them in mv team.
The big drawback of the mv team is that you are playing with model, not the
market behind the model. But the bank dont't expect the quant to play with
the market in the first place. | c********s
发帖数: 101 | 20 What you said is a reasonable outcome. Problem is, would you expect FO to
let go their job function without putting on a fight? And when things gets
ugly, it's not the best model wins, it's the team that controls the channel
of conversation with business (and executives) wins. I am guessing the FO is
holding the upper hand.
Of course, it all depends on the person that's pushing this change. As long
as he/she is tough enough, everything is possible.
.
did
the
【在 t********t 的大作中提到】
: Sooner or later the bank will find that a model validation team can handle
: most of the FO quant job, with less cost and more expertise and efficiency.
: Especially nowadays mv team is building their own independent library. I did
: see some banks let go all the FO quants and keep some of them in mv team.
: The big drawback of the mv team is that you are playing with model, not the
: market behind the model. But the bank dont't expect the quant to play with
: the market in the first place.
| | | n****e
发帖数: 629 | 21 hehe
我继续顶
MV就是用来满足regulator的
要清醒地认识到这一点 千万不要觉得自己给公司的model增加了多少value
你的value就是让model review过regulator这一关
你看刘经理就说了，他三年没得过MRA。。。多自豪啊 lol
要和前台搞好关系 你也许有朝一日会跳到那边去的
帮他们找点小毛病 重大问题上要齐心协力 公司利益才是大家的根本利益
hehe 也许我太cynical了
demand
the
every
are
be
food
chill
as
【在 c********s 的大作中提到】
: Some of my thoughts, bias because it's from the receiving end of MV. And
: situations must be different at different banks. I will delete this post
: after several days-- too much said. And if you get a sense who I am, just
: stop guessing. I am nobody, way down at the "bottom of the food chain" (
: Sorry, cannot help it, I am hopeless).
: The booming of MV represent a paradox posted by regulators. They demand
: banks to have a bigger centralized MV division after the crisis. This demand
: is not coming bottom-up from the business. So, no matter what MV wants to
: believe, their existence/booming is not coming from direct business needs.
: As a result, in essence, they work for the regulators. It's a paradox
| d********t
发帖数: 9628 | 22 一语道破
【在 n****e 的大作中提到】
: hehe
: 我继续顶
: MV就是用来满足regulator的
: 要清醒地认识到这一点 千万不要觉得自己给公司的model增加了多少value
: 你的value就是让model review过regulator这一关
: 你看刘经理就说了，他三年没得过MRA。。。多自豪啊 lol
: 要和前台搞好关系 你也许有朝一日会跳到那边去的
: 帮他们找点小毛病 重大问题上要齐心协力 公司利益才是大家的根本利益
: hehe 也许我太cynical了
:
| t********t
发帖数: 1264 | 23 Some MV head is actually very touch and tactical on this, especially when he
can see the point that most of the models are already well developed and
organized in the library. Less and less complex flow trades drive no demand
for super-sexy model anymore. When MV can be turned into a model centre for
the whole bank, he will fundamentally change the bank's corporate structure,
not to mention his own rank.
Here I am talking the FO models, not the CCR models. Well CCR is hot and be
the first priority of all banks. But that's for regulator and can not last
for long. The focus is actually the structural change of the FO and MV
relationship.
channel
is
long
【在 c********s 的大作中提到】
: What you said is a reasonable outcome. Problem is, would you expect FO to
: let go their job function without putting on a fight? And when things gets
: ugly, it's not the best model wins, it's the team that controls the channel
: of conversation with business (and executives) wins. I am guessing the FO is
: holding the upper hand.
: Of course, it all depends on the person that's pushing this change. As long
: as he/she is tough enough, everything is possible.
:
: .
: did
| n****e
发帖数: 629 | 24 CCR=CVA? capital charge在那呢。。。为啥不会last for long
MV如果成为FO的library quant了，还有independency么？
如果有independency，FO会愿意用么？（trader原来好好使唤的quant，忽然“
independent”了？？？）
没了independency 过得了regulator么？
hehe 想一想嘛
he
demand
for
structure,
be
【在 t********t 的大作中提到】
: Some MV head is actually very touch and tactical on this, especially when he
: can see the point that most of the models are already well developed and
: organized in the library. Less and less complex flow trades drive no demand
: for super-sexy model anymore. When MV can be turned into a model centre for
: the whole bank, he will fundamentally change the bank's corporate structure,
: not to mention his own rank.
: Here I am talking the FO models, not the CCR models. Well CCR is hot and be
: the first priority of all banks. But that's for regulator and can not last
: for long. The focus is actually the structural change of the FO and MV
: relationship.
| t********t
发帖数: 1264 | 25 you are talking about the regulator's requirement of keeping an independent
mv team. im talking about the long trend of model control in the bank. If
you can not see it, just look around the FO and count the number of library
quants here, compared with a few years ago. In general, Q-quant is declining.
【在 n****e 的大作中提到】
: CCR=CVA? capital charge在那呢。。。为啥不会last for long
: MV如果成为FO的library quant了，还有independency么？
: 如果有independency，FO会愿意用么？（trader原来好好使唤的quant，忽然“
: independent”了？？？）
: 没了independency 过得了regulator么？
: hehe 想一想嘛
:
: he
: demand
: for
| r**a
发帖数: 536 | 26
这一点我是同意的。要注意的是regulation的松紧程度是country by country的。不是
所有的地方都像美国那样松的。这样就导致了, MV的power也有很大的区别的。
从给公司增加value的角度来看，作为MV的一员，通常不应该认为自己会给公司增加了
多少多少的value。value这个东西在middle office不像FO那样可以直接衡量。所以作
为non-manager来说，没必要为这个玩意儿苦恼。如果单纯从工作的角度来说，MV的
quant可以直接play model，甚至做些blue sky research，而不用去考虑那些很dirty
的事情，这其实还是蛮有意思的。钱嘛，肯定比FO少啦，够用就是了。
另外，不是所有人都愿意跳到FO的。虽然钱多一些，但是工作时间长了，工作忙了，压
力大了，而且dirty work偏多。像我manager，很牛的人，在MV工作了10几年了，人家
就喜欢这份工作。m现在很多时候，前台的人要跑到我们组里问问题。
【在 n****e 的大作中提到】
: hehe
: 我继续顶
: MV就是用来满足regulator的
: 要清醒地认识到这一点 千万不要觉得自己给公司的model增加了多少value
: 你的value就是让model review过regulator这一关
: 你看刘经理就说了，他三年没得过MRA。。。多自豪啊 lol
: 要和前台搞好关系 你也许有朝一日会跳到那边去的
: 帮他们找点小毛病 重大问题上要齐心协力 公司利益才是大家的根本利益
: hehe 也许我太cynical了
:
| b*****d
发帖数: 271 | 27 说到我的心坎里去了。 每次碰到MV的jerk，我都想撞墙。有的MV发自内心的觉得提的
action item在做正确的事情， 但是考虑的角度是从数学出发，而不是practical
aspect for risk management， 其实是在浪费双方的时间和生命。
replied
about
of
we
me
my
lot
know
leader
model
understand
just
a
【在 c********s 的大作中提到】
: Interesting my post provoked a discussion around MV. Here is another of my
: posts. When someone working in MV ask about difficulties in work, I replied
: this. Just add to the discussion for fun. Someday I will dig a "Keng" about
: MV, so many things to say, feels like they want to burst out of me...Maybe
: when my boss is on vacation next week. BTW, we used out every single day of
: our vacation. Last time I checked, the bank is still functioning...guess we
: are not as important/successful as manager Liu.
: My reply is only applicable to new recruits, or someone lower level like me
: (quote: "bottom of the food chain"). If you are in a position to determine
: the direction of your MV department, go ahead fight for your territory,
| r**a
发帖数: 536 | 28 这就是我所说的一个好的model validator首先需要对模型有deep understanding，这
样才能make good suggestions。这个deep understanding包括为啥用这个模型而不用
别的，为啥用这种numerical method而不用别的，model的pro and con, etc.
我个人很同意在wilmott forum里面看到一个说法：一个好的model developer需要同时
是一个好的model validator。但是这是理想中的情况。现实是model developer迫于种
种压力，model validation的工作做得不够全面细致，这样MV就成为FO的一个有益补充
。反过来，一个好的model validator也需要同时是一个好的model developer，要学会
从model developer and risk manager的角度去想问题。至于将来是不是像前面同学说
的那样，MV是不是能取代FO，个人不好妄加断言。但是一个好的MV team绝对是FO
quant team的有益补充。毕竟人多力量大，前台想不到的东西，MV也许能想到。
反过来，遇到一个不太称职的model validator确实是很头疼的事情，这个我totally
understand。
【在 b*****d 的大作中提到】
: 说到我的心坎里去了。 每次碰到MV的jerk，我都想撞墙。有的MV发自内心的觉得提的
: action item在做正确的事情， 但是考虑的角度是从数学出发，而不是practical
: aspect for risk management， 其实是在浪费双方的时间和生命。
:
: replied
: about
: of
: we
: me
: my
|
|
