Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Goldman Sachs sent a computer scientist to jail over 8MB of open source code

blog.garrytan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 84 posts

Re: Goldman Sachs sent a computer scientist to jail over 8MB of open source code

#71

Post by Tyrannosaurs »

sriramk wrote: post #36
petegrif wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The notion that once be tried by a jury of one's peers is practically meaningless for any 'crime' involving scientific knowledge or any specialized competence.

If you read the original Vanity Fair piece, Lewis assembles a true 'jury' of his peers - that's the best part of the piece.

The problem with that is you tend to start narrowing down the views and opinions in that group.

People who work in IT tend to be smarter, richer, more inclined to be left leaning in their politics and so on. They have expertise to understand the problem but they don't necessarily represent the views of the country which is what a jury is meant to do.

Re: Goldman Sachs sent a computer scientist to jail over 8MB of open source code

#72

Post by cosmie »

mathattack wrote: post #70
Unosolo wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me it is not clear why stealing the proprietary code could have cost CG hundreds of millions of dollars. Proprietary code that wasn't developed and tested with generic requirements in mind can rarely be economically re-used outside of the original company context, as it reflects the structure and the processes of the mother-company. In fact most organisations I know decided to throw away their code base entirely w…

There's two reasons here... 1) As was mentioned by Shubb, there is a predatory aspect to algorithms. If I know how your algorithm will work, I can create one that will be it. You can think of it as programming robots to fight. If I've seen the source code for your robot, I may be able to program one that can exploit it's weaknesses. (Worked against the Death Star!) 2) The HFT world works best when the ideas aren't we…

Although it doesn't state what was taken, it does mention that the copied code in question is not related to the trading algorithms.

If it did, then Goldman's reaction would be well justified (to the extent that sub-millisecond arbitrage that siphons billions out of the markets each year and into the hands of a few firms can be justified).

Re: Goldman Sachs sent a computer scientist to jail over 8MB of open source code

#73

Post by tankenmate »

mathattack wrote: post #69
tankenmate wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bold statements require bold proof. Care to share?

Without having sat on the jury, I will have to rely on public documents for the relative size of Goldman's proprietary business. This may not meet your standard of proof. After the Volcker rule, it has become much tougher to find data on principal transactions, so let's go back to 2010 and look at the Financials of their annual review. http://www.goldmansachs.com/investor-relations/financials/cu... On page 58 of the…

But you have provided no proof as to whether the files he copied included the trading strategies. To quote

“Did you take the strats?” asked one (meaning Goldman’s trading strategies).

“No,” said Serge. That was one thing the prosecutors hadn’t accused him of.

Re: Goldman Sachs sent a computer scientist to jail over 8MB of open source code

#74

Post by tankenmate »

ig1 wrote: post #63
tankenmate wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the Vanity article explicitly states that the "Jury" asked him whether he took the strats (the trading strategies) and he said "No."; the response from the "Jury" was telling, they said "Why not take the valuable stuff?"

Pricing algorithms are different from trading strategies (although they're obviously related). In any case that's purely a matter of evidence, he either copied a piece of code or he didn't.

But breach of contract and copyright are civil issues, not criminal (modulo the insane copyright criminality laws of late). Besides, no damages have ever been postulated, let alone proved.

Re: Goldman Sachs sent a computer scientist to jail over 8MB of open source code

#75

Post by MyDogHasFleas »

After reading the whole VF article I come to two conclusions.

1. If you work for a company which (as I'm sure GS does) has a policy forbidding you from uploading company data to the public cloud, don't violate that policy. Especially if it's source code you wrote while working there. (The open source argument is a red herring. It doesn't matter.). And super especially if you're about to leave for a competitor.

2. If you work in an industry and for a company that is being scrutinized by the Feds and is heavily regulated, really REALLY don't violate policies like this arbitrarily and on your own, because you might go to jail.

Is it "fair" what happened to him? No. But lots of unfair things happen. He paved the way with his thoughtless actions.

Re: Goldman Sachs sent a computer scientist to jail over 8MB of open source code

#76

Post by ig1 »

tankenmate wrote: post #74
ig1 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pricing algorithms are different from trading strategies (although they're obviously related). In any case that's purely a matter of evidence, he either copied a piece of code or he didn't.

But breach of contract and copyright are civil issues, not criminal (modulo the insane copyright criminality laws of late). Besides, no damages have ever been postulated, let alone proved.

Trade secret violations can be prosecuted under criminal law, any company can request a criminal investigation in such a case. In the last decade there have been around 100 criminal convictions for theft of trade secrets.

Re: Goldman Sachs sent a computer scientist to jail over 8MB of open source code

#77

Post by nikcub »

dopamean wrote: post #62
nikcub wrote: post #22

The most interesting part of the reaction from the Vanity Fair piece for me is how so many geeks had no idea of this story until it was spelled out to them by a mainstream magazine (even though the Aleynikov case was extensively covered here on HN). Now would be a good time to highlight the cases of hackers that Michael Lewis doesn't have time to write about: Bo Zhang, Michael Meneses, the Madoff programmers, John Ka…

What's the story with the guys who worked for Madoff? I've heard nothing of this.

Here is a Wikipedia article on the upcoming federal trial, but a warning that it is all based on the indictment and doesn't have the defense side of the story:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Jerome_O'Hara_...

This case contradicts the FBI findings from the Madoff case, and relies on the programmers having of had to know that their system could also be used to print out fake trades.

Re: Goldman Sachs sent a computer scientist to jail over 8MB of open source code

#79

Post by gruseom »

walshemj wrote: post #60
gruseom wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was disappointed in that previous discussion. Take away the off-topic stuff and it seemed like most reactions varied from "Good, throw the book at him" to "God that guy was dumb". If Lewis' portrayal is accurate, then Aleynikov is pretty clearly an otherworldly technical type. That doesn't mean he should be exempt from laws, but it's not irrelevant either. For one thing, to anyone who knows the type, it says someth…

But playing the autistic spectrum (otherworldly technical types) card is an obvious legal ploy to try and mitigate the offense. And you are only hearing Aleynikovs side of the story obviously he and his lawyers going to portray himself as doing nothing wrong.

Only his side of the story? Rather the opposite. As far as I know his side has been told just this once.

I don't care about the "autistic spectrum", but I know this type of programmer, and if Lewis' portrayal is accurate (note the if, here and in what I said above), then this really is a mitigating factor. As a "legal ploy", it's far from obvious. Do you think Fabulous Fab could have used it?

Re: Goldman Sachs sent a computer scientist to jail over 8MB of open source code

#80

Post by gruseom »

ig1 wrote: post #42
gruseom wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was disappointed in that previous discussion. Take away the off-topic stuff and it seemed like most reactions varied from "Good, throw the book at him" to "God that guy was dumb". If Lewis' portrayal is accurate, then Aleynikov is pretty clearly an otherworldly technical type. That doesn't mean he should be exempt from laws, but it's not irrelevant either. For one thing, to anyone who knows the type, it says someth…

According to the indictment the source code included Goldman's propriety stock option pricing algos.

Was that mentioned in the article? If it was, I missed it.

If he did copy such algorithms with the intention to use them at the new job, that would contradict both my comment and Lewis' portrayal.

Post reply on HN