Imformation Age since ... 20 years

Last week-end I visited the Science Museum in London, and more precisely the Information Age new exhibition. One of the displays describes the invention of the “WWW” at the CERN in the early 90s. One of the dates that attracted my attention in the panel was the date of the first WWW conference: May 1994. The conference's site is still working!

This reminded me that I was an early web “designer” (you can decide what the inverted commas mean for yourself once you have seen the result). I was surprised to see that some of my early “pieces of art” are still alive, for example: http://www.ulb.ac.be/assoc/bms/bbms.html

An almost empty and obsolete since 10 years page, but still a piece of www archeology. I don’t remember when I designed the Belgian Mathematical Society first web site, but it was obviously before the 16 February 1996. That was almost 20 years ago and less than 2 years into the www history.

What I remember from the design is that the it was done by manually typing the HTML code in a text editor, selecting the colors by changing the color code in the HTML code and looking at the results.

This is not directly related to the “Multi-curve framework” book... Except in the sense that WWW was disruptive technology invented in a academic framework that has been adopted in a couple of years and became the industry standard. This is not very different to the multi-curve framework which was a academic curiosity in July 2007 and a industry standard a couple of years later, ... less the impact on the daily life of people.

Comments

  1. Cécile1 February 2015 at 07:40

    Un pionnier, donc ! En 1996, je ne savais même pas ce que c'était Internet!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Multi-curve framework book: new edition in progress

Image
Subject: Interest Rate Modelling in the Multi-curve Framework: Foundations, Evolution, and Implementation It has been more than 10 years since I wrote the first edition of the multi-curve framework book. What happened in those 10 years? Why did it take me so long to start a new version? It took me roughly 10 years to write the first edition. The reason it took so long at that time, was that I did not know that I was writing it! I thought I was writing a couple of pages on an obscured and theoretical idea that there was not a `` one curve to rule them all '' but multiple curves. It turned out that it became the actual practice for very clear and important reasons. That was the excuse for the first edition, what is the excuse for the second edition? Since the first edition, many things happen, in particular: March 2015: BCBS - IOSCO: margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives and mandatory variation margin July 2017: The future of LIBOR -- actually it
Read more

Rigged: part 1 - Will there be a part 2?

Image
I have been reading book “Rigged: The Incredible True Story of the Whistleblowers Jailed after Exposing the Rotten Heart of the Financial” (Andy Verity, Flint, June 2023) for some time. It was published several month ago, but I just finished it. To my defence, I have to say that I don’t feel comfortable reading fiction where the “bad guys” are systematically winning by cheating. The book is the story of the miscarriage of justice done in the LIBOR manipulation story. The book content did not surprise me. For anybody having worked on a (swap) trading desk, it is clear that what was described by the accusation was impossible. It is not possible for some middle level trader to create a multi-year, multi-desk, multi-bank international conspiracy over open lines, broker lines, on open offices etc. without all around them, including compliance and senior management to be fully aware of what is going on. Moreover the regulators cannot be ignorant of the situation, except pleading complete in
Read more

A personal statement on the IOSCO Statement on Alternatives to USD Libor

IOSCO has issued a document called “Principles for Financial Benchmarks” in 2013. As such it acted as an (unofficial/unelected) lawmaker. On 3 July 2023, the same IOSCO issued a “ Statement on Alternatives to USD Libor ”. The Statement looks like a tribunal judgement from a trial with no public hearing, no witness, and no defense right from a tribunal with no mandate to judge. And publish on the day before Independence Day! Some personal comments on the document. Transparency The statement indicated “Administrators should consider whether to improve the transparency of their rates". The IOSCO document lack minimum transparency. It does not indicate in any way the “varying degrees of vulnerability of concern“ of the analysed benchmarks. The name of the benchmark are not even indicated. This creates a culpability by association to all non-SOFR benchmarks. The statement refers to a Review of Alternatives to USD Libor ; to my knowledge, the review itself is not available. The st
Read more