Slashdot Mirror
JPMorgan Chase Spends $500 Million On a Data Center
1sockchuck writes "JPMorgan Chase spends $500 million to build a data center, according to CEO Jamie Dimon. That figure places the firm's facilities among the most expensive in the industry, on a par with investments by Google and Microsoft in their largest data centers. Dimon discussed the firm's IT spending in an interview in which he asserts that huge data centers are among the advantages of ginormous banks. Dimon also offered a vigorous defense of the U.S. banking industry. 'Most bankers are decent, honorable people,' Dimon says. 'We're wrapped up in all this crap right now. We made a mistake. We're sorry. It doesn't detract from all the good things we've done. I am not responsible for the financial crisis.'"
Ya... they're sorry; sorry all the way to the bank!
Wait...
How much does JPM still owe the US Government?
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
It doesn't detract from all the good things we've done.
Can I get a line item listing of these "good things"?
brandelf -t FreeBSD
Don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.
'We're wrapped up in all this crap right now. We made a mistake. We're sorry. It doesn't detract from all the good things we've done. I am not responsible for the financial crisis."
Actually, it *is* your fault, and it *does* detract from everything you've done.
It's like a daycare provider saying "Sorry that we sold your kids' organs. It seemed like a good investment. But it shouldn't detract from the great job we were doing before that!"
Banks are supposed to MAKE money, not lose it. And they lost money on a MASSIVE scale due to incompetence and especially greed. Everything they do is tainted, forever.
Yeah, and serial killers are always described as real nice people by their neighbors.
hope you have cancer. Now go fuck yourself.
It was cute when your mom let you say that when you were 6. It's not a word! /Get off my lawn!
Enormous, Gigantic --Pick one.
Sorry, Jamie: your company has become largely a parasite. For the average American, you provide no more benefit than 10 banks 1/10th your size: when you get so big, you have negative economies-of-scale.
But your salary is dictated by being big.
If you were serious about preventing such disasters in the future, you'd reform your compensation schemes and endorse restoring Glass-Steagal.
Test your net with Netalyzr
Is it just me or do i not see that quote in the article? Most bankers are decent, honorable people,' Dimon says. 'We're wrapped up in all this crap right now. We made a mistake. We're sorry. It doesn't detract from all the good things we've done. I am not responsible for the financial crisis.'"
When JPMorgan is busted up into regional banks -- some of which do investment banking, the others FDIC insured savings & loans -- will they be able to share this server farm?
I have not once opened a Chase bank account, but through mergers and acquisitions they owned 5 of my accounts at one time. Easily the worst bank I have ever had to deal with. But now I know where all my interest charges and late fees went to.
A funny side note...Capital One has done the same thing to me, they now own 3 of my accounts. I hope they're an easier bank to work with if something goes wrong.
I don't see banks as the source of the problem, they are part of the problem because they cooperate with the corrupt government, but they are not the source, the source is the government, however I do have a specific problem with JPMorgan and one particular person there - Blythe Masters.
She is pretty much somewhere near the root of the naked short defaults swaps and AFAIC, naked credit is just as much counterfeiting as the fractional reserve and the Federal reserve with its fake credit line.
JPMorgan holds a gigantic position in naked shorts against the silver market (and other markets), it's amazing that this particular activity isn't investigated, but the fact that it exists is just another side effect of fake fiat currency provided by the central banks.
MY OTHER COMMENTS
reinstitute Glass-Stegall, preventing conglomerates of investment banks with commercial lenders backed by government-insured savings and checking accounts. And the assembling of massive coast-to-coast financial supermarkets like Bank of America and Citibank should never have been approved by Federal regulators under the Clinton and Bush administrations.
Dimon and JPMC actually proves the rule. After the 2008 banking crash and TARP fiasco, Dimon was anointed as proof that not every big bank CEO was a bad egg. (Although JPMC accepted TARP money, they did so because Henry Paulson asked them to, not because they necessarily needed it). Jamie Dimon, said John McCain and many others, was old school and took his responsibilities to the world economy and banking industry seriously.
Obviously, not seriously enough in the face of the non-ending quest for superior returns and mind-blowing take home pay.
He was still scum. And these bankers are laundering their drug money. This guy is trying to redefine decent and honorable. "Mistake" I like that.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
just got word from robert half tech and another hire firm in orlando fl for contract work for jp chase
once again.
... is that he's not the devil.
I am not responsible for the financial crisis.
No raindrop feels it's responsible for the flood.
Instead of ranting about how it's not his fault, why didn't he just repeatedly mutter phrases about 'Big Data' and 'Cloud Infrastructure' to the reviewer?
"I am not responsible for the financial crisis."
No, but the people who work for you were. And you're supposed to be in charge.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
This Dimon fellow is the best used car salesman I've seen for a while.
He kinda alludes to the fact that they will use this fantastic new data center for customer service. My guess is they will probably use it to scam more money from people with some devilish plot like HFT.
"The ferrets, they're every where I tell you!"
'Most bankers are decent, honorable people,'
Being decent and honorable isn't worth shit if the institution they work for is monstrous.
That's what it boils down to, at the end of the day. They internalised the profits and externalised the losses as best they could. They would have blown that bubble up for eternity if they could have, and paid no heed to the consequences. They want every cent you have, no less. Regulation kept them in chains, and now those chains are broken.
What we've witnessed is 30 years of large financial institutions gradually being allowed to do exactly what the fuck they want. Naturally, the monster devoured so much, so greedily, and took such monumental risks that it took merely a few years of true excess for it to ignite the biggest world slump since 1929. It didn't learn from then, it didn't repent or change its ways, and you can be sure as hell that it hasn't learned now. The devastation it wrought will happen again and again, simply because destruction is all it knows.
In light of that grim reality, who gives a toss how decent they are as individuals.
So does this mean I can now use punctuation marks in my password? Seriously, you can't do this for online banking at Chase.
"We were a port of safety in the storm."
“It’s a free. Fucking. Country.”
This article really makes me angry. Who does this support other than the IT industry that supplies them with 500 Million in servers, networking equipment & infrastructure?
What is this data center going to do? A grad student could design a decent database system for trades and banking. So they now have a 500 million $ data center, are they now going to use that scrape a few more milliseconds off there HFT's or the associated algorithm's? Are they going to figure out the optimal market strategy to beat there competitors? They can't possibly have enough data to fill something like that, so it has to computation power, right?
How does this contribute to society other than support an electric company? Don't give me liquidity bullshit.
Separate your banking from investing and then we can talk about how "banks" like this isn't a plague on society. /rant
>> JPMorgan Chase spends $500 million to build a data center...asserts that huge data centers are among the advantages of ginormous banks.
Remind me to short JPMorganChase tonight. Even the tiniest bank has access to "huge data centers" today because most banks already use an outsourced financial processor...which are all hosted in centralized, redundant data centers (which generally cost less than $500M).
Seems like this guy missed the leveling effect of cloud services - one that descended on the banking industry a good 10-15 years ago.
No one person is. The financial crisis was built by a huge number of people.
But he did contribute. Part of the financial crisis is the lack of regulation in the industry. The London Whale incident proved we're not quite past it. Mr. Dimon sure as hell lobbied for less regulation.
I liken regulation to maintenance on your heart. The parallel is... your heart rhythm is surprisingly similar to the general market health. There are inputs (you're sick, you're running you're sleeping... vs. general economic news, P/E ratios, etc) and even feedback. It works most of the time. I wouldn't want to be on an EKG all day. You're not gonna put a pacemaker in me to regulate my heart-rate for the odd chance i may need it some day. Its a waste of the machine and my time.
But... every once in a while a heart can get out of whack. You get arrhythmia, and you need to shock it back to normal. My grandmother has a pacemaker. She'd be dead now if it wasn't for that. She also had a heart attack, luckily enough she was in the hospital when it happened, so she's ok. By the "never regulate" crowd's wisdom, they'd say "well, there are so many people's hearts that work fine that a pacemaker is never needed, it a complicated surgery that just gets in the way" she'd not have a pacemaker, and they'd assume she'd magically adjust.
So, we need to strike the balance. Too much regulation/heart shocking kills the market/patient. But, many people see the normal market/healthy heart and say "hey, we'll never need regulation, it's wasted money". They say, don't even have the doctor, don't even have the defibrillator. Well, then when the market shock comes, they're unprepared, and we all die. Or in this case, we came in in the last minute with the shock, too late, and the patient has limped along. And half the country states that the problem was the defibrillator, that somehow the heart attack patient would have magically come back all on their own.
now blow his wang like a good republican should!
I would guess that given the implosion of US market volume and all that space built out recently demand for DC space is just not there. Smart players (like BATS for example) are picking up space freed up by other at discount. Looks like JPMorgan is not in this category.
That is what you usually find behind these projects.
As to "we made a mistake", if that were all it was, why are those few bad apples not in prison and stripped of their fortunes? You let it happen on your watch, you are just as guilty as these criminals!
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
We're wrapped up in all this crap right now. We made a mistake.
We as in the innocent, good bankers, or we as in the innocent, good bankers?
The mistake was greed, so 'we' is pretty straight forward mixing a bunch of words to make it sound good and admitting fault.
Remind me again how many "too big to fail" banks/finance firms/etc. have been broken up since 2007?
It's a first seeing all comments only on one - at least those marked as 3+.
Sadly they will go under the bridge, and banks will continue to play their games with us. What I'm scared the most is that we really can't do anything about it :(
I refinanced a couple of years ago with Quicken Loans. They told me if mortgage rates dropped within two years they would automagically lower my rate. What they didn't tell me is that they would immediately sell my mortgage. Turns out they sold it to Chase. So now I am stuck with these bastards unless I want to refinance again. I will probably do it but I will ask more questions this time. Damn, I haven't posted here for a while. =D
I know what the Internet is, what the hell is this Interweb business?!
The wonderful cleverly named "Community Reinvestment Act" was passed by Congress in the early 70s and banks nationwide were virtually told they must lend to poor credit risks in undesirable areas or face losing their banking charters.
So if you were a banker back then, what would you do, sell out, find a way around the coming bad loans or look for a method (read Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) to offload the low quality loans.
But regulations are bad!
Some regulations are bad. How often do we geeks criticize regulations/law/policies addressing the internet, computers, or other tech areas? What makes you think the US Congress does a better job in the domain of banking and finance than they do in the domain of technology?
There is nothing inherently wrong with wanting to reform regulations. The problem is that reforming regulations can be done as poorly as creating and implementing regulations.
The "Community Reinvestment Act" doesn't require loans to poor credit risks.
They could have got almost 5 of these for 1 mistake of their chief investment officer: http://www.hangthebankers.com/only-on-wall-street/
As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a reference to Godwin's Law approaches 1
Here is one example. of a banker who most would consider "good". Two observations: 1. It's news that a banker is good. 2. It's a very small bank.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
Now maybe they'll actually review past purchases before calling/texting me every three weeks or so about how some transactions I make all the time could be fraud. sigh.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
The depositor is not the banks customer, it's the borrower that they loan your money too and then give you a fraction of the interest that they "earn"
I'm not sure about everything this data center will allow JPMorgan Chase to do, but I'll bet this this $500 million investment has nothing to do with improving the banking experience for the average customer.
Banks make large technical investments into systems that allow money to money easily enter their financial system (so they can use ait and earn interest on other people money) or to get money out of their bank through a transaction that will incur a fee charged to the customer by the bank.
Look at where banks have invested their tech money. One small example:
I can insert a handwritten check for deposit into an ATM (or take a photo of it) and it's OCR can decipher everything short of my doctor's handwriting. But when I issue a check online (and type in the payee's name for them), when I go to download the information for Quickbooks they can't give me the payee's name (it will either say 'check' or 'deposit'. Then I need to go through every check image in my statement to input the correct data. If they can make the investment into OCR on a check being deposited, I don;t think it would be too much to ask for them to to OCR on checks I've written so I can get the data back from them.
Why don't they do this? The no incentive. They earn interest on money comping into the bank, so it make since for them to make that as easy as possible, but they lose money on money going out of the bank, so where's their ROI on that?
There in none, that's why if I want something that kind of give me the service I want tack on an extra $15/mo charge to each of my accounts to do direct to Quickbooks PC banking.
What a crock.
I suspect that this data center will not be stocked with the cheap modular drones found in most cloudy data centers. Given that JPMorgan is first and foremost a bank, clusters of big blue mainframes are more likely. So, that $500MM probably won't go as far in terms of server node quantity as it would for Microsoft or Google.
That $500 million price tag tells me one thing - someone is making a killing !
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Hmmmm, I wonder who owns the multiple new CRS-3 chock full of 10G Ethernet ports next to my cage... I have a pretty good idea - and 500M is a drop in the bucket for them.
I have been to an awful lot of data centers and it's not trivial to build or maintain them. I am aware of more than one that wanted to expand but couldn't because of power issues. One of them was going to require a "couple" of new substations. Another one needed a new power main that would require substantial trenching through an urban area.... Datacenters are not built like normal buildings. They are built to be hardened, self-sufficient, and have multiple levels of fail-safes -- that isn't cheap. If my home AC goes out, I'll just be hot. If a Liebert 20 ton AC fails in one of these places, blade servers overheat, vast arrays of businesses go dark.
Dimon's comments are interesting, but the costs don't strike me as far outside the norm. There are more than a few companies out there who have made very major expenditures in infrastructure.. Most don't detail it, for obvious reasons.
WE GOT CAUGHT.
I hope Jamie has that private jet on hot stand by when his plan to dump JP Morgan's silver holdings. Lots of people I know want Jamie's head...on a pike.
From the index count that shouldn't be too long. Probably 9 months max before the game is afoot.
Hack
Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
The Fox News inspired notion that the CRA was responsible for this financial crisis is so much bullshit.
To me this seems as a good investment. Can not invest in housing, thats still down. Most companies make things in china and say they are design by united states people, but invest in them your not helping. Now adays a good network and computer system can be the backbone of your company. Chase payment system has left me in despair before and I try to cut ties. They seem to just nice enough when your struggling to hit hard when your not looking. just my 2 cents!
No banker has been criminally charged regarding the financial crisis even though it is well accepted they did not behave in their Customer's interests. However, the goldman sachs programmer keeps getting charged over and over again. An that is not the only example. It is a double standard of the rich vs everyone else.
'Most bankers are decent, honorable people,' Dimon says. 'We're wrapped up in all this crap right now. We made a mistake. We're sorry. It doesn't detract from all the good things we've done. I am not responsible for the financial crisis.'
I call bovine effluent. They perpetuate an unsustainable cycle and thusly are part of the problem.
Quite the opposite, the CRA (of 1977!,) requires
CRA lending needed to be done "consistent with safe and sound operation." In 1999, banking regulators issued guidance concerning sub-prime lending and made the point that CRA lending needed to be responsible -- well underwritten, well priced, and understandable by the borrower.
Also
With respect to performance, Canner and Bhutta did three types of analysis. First, looking at mortgages originated between January 2006 and April 2008, they found that sub-prime and Alt-A loans originated in zip codes with incomes just below the level that "counts" for CRA purposes performed slightly better than those originated in zip codes with incomes just above the CRA level. They also looked at the performance of first mortgages originated under the affordable-lending programs of NeighborWorks America, most of which counted for CRA purposes, and found that these loans had delinquency rates lower than sub-prime or Federal Housing Administration loans, and foreclosure rates lower even than prime loans. Finally, they noted that only about 30 percent of foreclosure filings in 2006 took place in CRA-eligible zip codes. link
That's right, tightly regulated lenders making first mortgages under the CRA had a lower foreclosure rate than largely unregulated lenders making other types of mortgage loans including prime loans. Blaming the CRA for the foreclosure crisis is the reddest of red herrings and allows the true culprits (independent mortgage originators and their enablers in the securitization arms of the big banks and the credit rating agencies) to walk away scott free.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Don't blame a non-living thing in blaming a corporate 'body' itself (and please, to anyone replying? Spare me the legalese b.s. that courts use to personalize corporate "bodies" - it's because we're talking about people's lives here in their funds that kept them going being outright stolen) - doing that, it depersonalizes it, and yes that matters here. Why? Simple/easy: Someone human or a pack of such evil trolls made a decision behind everything. Someone else said it on this page: Don't piss down my neck and tell me it's raining. Saying anything that was done by banks (because they're composed of decision making boards) was ok, corporate body or not? Is way, Way, WAY off! People got robbed. No other way around it. Bigtime.
"(they didn't get into subprime stuff)"
According to Reuters, in 2007 JPM was involved in subprime lending: "JPMorgan's first-quarter subprime mortgage originations, through Chase Home Finance, jumped 11 percent to $3.02 billion, according to Inside Mortgage Finance." So your knowledge may be more personal than reliable. And as of 2012, according to other sources, is still involved in Credit Default Swaps so there is reason to continue distrusting banks.
Do you hear of any US banks that want Glass-Steagall reinstated? No? Banks want regulations that protect them with a facade of trust, not restrict them from unlimited salaries and shareholder profits. But hey, at least they'll be hiring some database and network admins.
"Most" of the bankers who are "good people" are hanging around enabling those who aren't by not demanding effective change at the levels that matter (governance, regulatory oversight).
Apologies aren't good enough. Point us to some real change that bites the psychopaths who rise to the top.
Suggestions: smaller institutions, less opaque financial instruments, fewer ex-bankers crossing the floor to work inside government.
I don't see why any person who has held an executive position at Goldman Sachs should be welcomed into any U.S. government agency with real power. At best they should be allowed to work inside some toothless intermediary and reporting to other agencies with no personal loyalties to Goldman whatsoever.
If the argument is "we need these people because no-one else understands how the system works" then Plan A is to simplify the system with extreme prejudice.
Who says? Me. Others? Those who don't have to see the fact that I am.
come on, who else read that as "Most bankers are decent, horrible people"
He claims that most bankers are honest, hard workers, which is true, most bankers don't have the power to do any of the insane things that happened; these things were done by the higher ups, and centering on the higherups in only a few companies.
They he says they all apologize, meaning that low-level-just-doing-their-job-bankers are apologizing for shit their psychotic management caused.
You can't say that most bankers had nothing to do with it, and then say they all apologize. You're just lumping the honest, hard working, low-level bankers, in with your senior management bastards who destroyed the world's economy.
Say YOU're sorry, not WE're, or at least clarify that the WE refers to the senior management, and explicitely exclude the honest, hard workers, or it just seems like you are trying to use them as scapegoats, (which you probably are, but you don't have to draw attention to it).
People don't want to hear this. If you took out a loan you knew you would have trouble repaying, if you have to work 2-3 jobs to be able to pay your overly expensive house, etc, etc, etc you are also responsible. If people live within their means, take personal responsibility and refuse to lend money they can't repay, the banks will get nowhere with their stupid stunts.
There is no law that says you HAVE to own a house. Owning a house does not make your life better. A house is NOT an investment. It is a millstone around your neck until the day it is paid off. And only then, if you're lucky, you might 'make money' by selling it. Of course, then you have to find somewhere else to live. In the mean time, the house costs a fortune to maintain and some people like to 'upgrade' their kitchens, bathrooms and curtains every year or two - money that is never added to the calculation of the 'profit' they're making on the house. And often this extra expense is paid for by ridiculously expensive loans.
No, most of us (myself included) are to some extent responsible for this mess.
Dimon is "sorry", yet pretends that he did "good things"? WTF!!! That's a joke, right?
Perhaps he's sorry that, as one of the biggest crooks in the world, he didn't go to jail? Or maybe he's sorry about the wash trading he did, and that he got only a 30k fine, for manipulating the crude oil markets? Or probably, he is sorry for JP-Morgan naked short selling on the Silver market? Or for emitting more bonds of Silver than they physically have? Or...
Come on, we all know what these data centers are for. They are for doing high frequency trading. It's been a long time that we all know such trades are destroying more wealth than it creates.
Such declaration is simply outrageous. We're tired of the financial terrorists. None have been punished, yet destroying jobs and lives by the millions, and proves of that accumulating. This one day will stop, once the general public understands what is going on. They'd better have strong necks when that day comes, because probably, their head will go off, just like in the French revolution.
In the mean time, since the people have lost their power over this disgusting "elite", everyone should play on the same game, and buy (physical) silver coins. Not only this is a very good investment, especially considering today's record low, but this also has the side effect of crashing JP-Morgan, since (as I wrote above) they did very dangerous bets, and already lost billions. As Max Keiser puts it: "GO GO! Silver liberation army!"
And wash trading (eg: manipulating market prices by buying and selling at the same time), and MF global scandal, and naked short sellings, and accounting fraud, and selling Silver they don't have, and...
The list goes on, and on, and on, and on. But nobody "regulates" them. Or rather, should I say, nobody does JUSTICE, and put these crooks in jail.
So, when I read that [JP Morgan is] "in favor of tougher (and substantive!) regulations", one may wonder what this means.
Why are we paying for your crap?
No individual copyright violator feels they're the one that contributes to a problem.
..causing the Y2K threat.. We clean it up and no one (citation required) gets hurt. Banking industry screws up and an entire generation loses their life savings.
"We made a mistake. We're sorry. " -- really? How about giving back all those millions in bonuses?
Dear Banksters,
At this time, we who are forcefully being unconstitutionally ruled, by a Government who enables you, accept your apology.
The 100 million People who's lives you screwed and people killed because of your actions is apparently just fine with the unconstitutional DHS who is buying massive amounts of bullets, explosives, and exotic equipment in fear of the Civil war your actions are leading up to.
It's in that light, that we suggest a final piece of advise.
If you do it again, you and your enablers had better run for your lives.
Thanks for the link, excerpt, and summary.
Just to send a big "FUCK YOU" to jp morgan, and remove a lot of the autotrading.
"I am not responsible for the financial crisis."
That's coming from the company that came up with the credit default swap that was responsible for the financial crisis.
Spend $500 million, and you have a high frequency trading center, a tangible asset. It might underpin a technology that makes the entire financial system fragile, but a hard asset is a hard asset. Pissing away $2 billion is a drunken cowboy exercise writ large. We are very sorry, but not quite sorry enough not to do it again, and since we spend way less than that on lobbying, you can't stop us, so there!
He is responsible for the financial crisis.
So, when I read that [JP Morgan is] "in favor of tougher (and substantive!) regulations", one may wonder what this means.
It means exactly what you hint at. It's meaningless talk to convince a target audience of properly educated intellectuals. It's fake regulations, lobbied and created by the banking industry. A financial industry which has repeatedly demonstrated, on local and foreign economies, it's systemic skill in taking from the many to give to the few.
What's needed? Among addressing the issues you raises (speculative investments), perhaps also more small local banks and no multinational corporations which are too big to control. It's what the 99 Percenters, Occupy Wall Streeters, and others are working toward.
Why did banks borrow 10s of billions from the discount window along side billions in TARP loans, if they needed neither?
Why did banks mislead the public about 'fortress balance sheets' while borrowing 10s of billions to survive?
Why pretended bank executives are good people when they caused widespread foreclosures after receiving public handouts?
I believe in real capitalism, where everyone pays the same tax rate and banks don't get handouts because they are "to big to fail".