7 ms·

Does anyone feel like the Ex-Goldman Programmer did something shady/questionable ethically but nothing that should be considered illegal?

cwyers 12y ago
> Does anyone feel like the Ex-Goldman Programmer did something shady/questionable ethically Like working for Goldman Sachs?
- rifung 12y ago
  Please excuse my ignorance but why is working for Goldman Sachs shady?
  - rmxt 12y ago
    I am not sure if this is what the GP is basing that opinion on, but there is quite a long list of controversies associated with GS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs#Controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs#Controversies Among the HN crowd I am sure you will find people on both sides of this issue: some people will think that GS is not working on 'good' problems that better the world, therefore, it is 'shady' to work there; and others will argue that GS is abstractly bettering the world through efficient resource/money allocation, especially for developing countries.
    - tormeh 12y ago
      >others will argue that GS is abstractly bettering the world through efficient resource/money allocation, especially for developing countries This would be true if GS didn't scam people, which they do. I accept the investment allocation argument, but I'm not convinced that it's valid for GS specifically. EDIT: Holy shit, that controversies section just goes on and on. I just checked, and it's 7000 words long. This company's insane.
      - cheepin 12y ago
        "that controversies section just goes on and on. I just checked, and it's 7000 words long. This company's insane." That's what I was thinking. That's an awful lot of smoke if there's no fire.
    - PhantomGremlin 12y ago
      some people will think that GS is not working on 'good' problems that better the world Nonsense. Lloyd Blankfein, the CEO of Goldman, is on record that the company is just "doing God’s work". http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/goldman-chief-says-he-is-just-doing-gods-work/ http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/goldman-chief-says-he... /sarcasm
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - LLWM 12y ago
    Because a lot of people are desperate to rationalize not being employed there.
  - beeworker 12y ago
    Anything that even smells like the financial and banking industry is considered shady by a lot of people, not just programmers, after our Great Recession. A necessary evil at best, and for programmers one that pays very well. In any case, it was a good zing.
  - jbob2000 12y ago
    They have way too much power as a private organization. I think that kind of power scares people. One bad commit and the world's economy crashes.
  - chrisbennet 12y ago
    Google "goldman starvation" for one such example.
  - cwyers 12y ago
    I first heard about the programmer mentioned in this article in Michael Lewis' "Flash Boys," which goes into great detail about how places like Goldman let high-frequency trading firms into their "dark pool" to make money off arbitrage by being able to make orders faster than anyone else, and then steering their customers into their dark pools rather than executing the trades in the way most beneficial to their customers. I find that sort of thing to be rather unethical at best -- if I hire a broker, I expect them to buy and sell stocks in the way that best benefits me, not whichever one benefits some high-frequency trading firm the most.
    - sz4kerto 12y ago
      > if I hire a broker, I expect them to buy and sell stocks in the way that best benefits me, not whichever one benefits some high-frequency trading firm the most. This is not just the ethical way, this is the only legal approach. As a broker, you can't frontrun, etc.
      - tptacek 12y ago
        I don't feel like I remember _Flash Boys_ making a case that GS was frontrunning its clients. In fact, the book I read was trying to make a case that the giant banks (and their clients) were victims of small shady HFT firms.
    - tptacek 12y ago
      Nobody I've ever talked to that has worked in trading thinks _Flash Boys_ is a good book. There's a whole other book written as a rebuttal to it that is chock full of the technical details that Lewis' book lacks: http://www.amazon.com/Flash-Boys-Insiders-Perspective-High-Frequency-ebook/dp/B00P0QI2M2 http://www.amazon.com/Flash-Boys-Insiders-Perspective-High-F... --- and, if you haven't read it (do! it's great!), know that the objections aren't about the morality tale Lewis is trying to tell, but rather that none of the details of his case against HFT actually make any sense. Another good book that is recommended constantly in these threads is _Dark Pools_. Dark Pools is also a great sort of rags-to-riches story about the emergence of the most important electronic markets from tiny startups; it's a good read.
rayiner 12y ago
On most days I feel like you should never be able to get jail time for a crime that doesn't involve physical violence.
- angersock 12y ago
  rayiner...are...are you feeling alright? anything we can do?
  - tptacek 12y ago
    I don't know if this a playful inside joke you and Rayiner share, but if it's a jab, it's a pretty annoying and superficial one.
    - angersock 12y ago
      Usual posts by rayiner tend to be rather conservative, and oftentimes, rather pro-government. Seeing him arguing for something rather out of character is the joke. If you go back and look at his post history, you'll see some things going either way--but I don't think that makes the joke any less funny. I use different things when poking fun at you. :)
      - tptacek 12y ago
        We should be a little more careful about assuming we can project entire ideologies onto people from their comments. I think it's probably pretty apparent why I'm sore about that point. Sorry to make a thing out of it though.
        angersock 12y ago
        I think it's fine to model people's ideologies according to their comments, so long as we are able to adapt that model when new data happens. Similarly, if we consistently comment in ways that don't match our ideology, we shouldn't be upset when people draw incorrect conclusions about us. Anyways, no harm done...it's just a few pg funbucks.
sz4kerto 12y ago
That sounds like his job description. Obviously this is an exaggeration but GS essentially played against their own clients in many cases. Edit: (There are stuff on the net about this, like http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/26/goldman-sachs-emails-firm_n_552464.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/26/goldman-sachs-email..., but many of us know this system from the inside :) ).
rhino369 12y ago
We'd throw people in jail for stealing your car, why not for stealing very valuable trade secrets?
- hueving 12y ago
  A car is rivalrous. A trade secret is not.
  - tedunangst 12y ago
    How is a secret not rivalrous? If everybody knows it, it's not a secret.
    - dredmorbius 12y ago
      Value-through-exclusivity doesn't mean that the entity itself is rivalrous. Take my car, and now you have my car and I don't. Take my trade secret, and now both of us have it. I haven't lost the knowledge itself. The value may well have declined, however. That very point was made by Thomas Jefferson on patents: "If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me." http://www.businessinsider.com/thomas-jefferson-on-patents-2011-7?op=1 http://www.businessinsider.com/thomas-jefferson-on-patents-2...
      - tedunangst 12y ago
        I think "stealing a trade secret" is a reasonable shorthand for "stealing the exclusivity, thereby reducing the value, of a trade secret".
lucozade 12y ago
He will have willfully broken the terms of his contract. That's generally considered illegal and GS should have a fairly strong civil case against him given what the defence has admitted to. Can't for the life of me think why this should be a criminal case though. Not sure how the American people are served by a conviction.
- fweespeech 12y ago
  Yeah, that is my problem with it. It isn't a criminal case, just a civil one.
- fastball 12y ago
  Is "illegal" not generally reserved for criminal law? Sure, he broke his contract, and yes, that is grounds for a civil suit. But I'm not sure I would call it "illegal".
  - dmix 12y ago
    It is still technically in violation of a (civil) law so it could be considered illegal. But agreed, typically illegal is most often used in the context of criminal matters.
a8da6b0c91d 12y ago
I have the strong sense that the New York court system, both federal and state, are particularly corrupt. The NYC based bankers all look out for each other. If you're plugged into the financial scene at the right levels in the NYC area, you're untouchable, and anyone who affronts you is going down. How else can you explain John Corzine is still walking free and Madoff was never arrested for years despite many people screaming there was an obvious fraud? Why do you think they had to extradite some guy all the way from London in their search for a scapegoat for the Flash Crash? These people have a mutual protection gang going.
- PhantomGremlin 12y ago
  How else can you explain John Corzine is still walking free I'm sure you know this, but for others not following so closely: the commodities broker for the "guy" from London was MF Global, the sleazy firm that Corzine was running during the Flash Crash So now they are trying to extradite a minnow, but the scum heading MF Global have so far avoided any fallout. As Wiki puts it[1]: "Crimes have been committed here without a doubt. We think there are enough facts out here to start arresting people and start filing charges." However, by August 2012, criminal investigators had concluded that charges against Corzine, or any other of MF Global's former executives or employees would be unlikely. MF Global allowed some clown trading out of his house to place orders for billions of dollars of futures contracts. If any reasonable percentage of those had been filled, the disruption to the markets would have been enormous. Not only did the "guy" in London not have enough capital to place those orders, they were big enough that MF Global itself didn't have enough capital. Of course, MF Global shortly later turned out to be a shell game, so maybe all that would have happened is they would have blown up a few months earlier. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MF_Global#April_2012:_Possible_Criminal.2C_Civil_Actions_Against_Executives.2C_Employees https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MF_Global#April_2012:_Possible...

cwyers 12y ago

> Does anyone feel like the Ex-Goldman Programmer did something shady/questionable ethically Like working for Goldman Sachs?

rifung 12y ago
Please excuse my ignorance but why is working for Goldman Sachs shady?
- rmxt 12y ago
  I am not sure if this is what the GP is basing that opinion on, but there is quite a long list of controversies associated with GS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs#Controversies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs#Controversies Among the HN crowd I am sure you will find people on both sides of this issue: some people will think that GS is not working on 'good' problems that better the world, therefore, it is 'shady' to work there; and others will argue that GS is abstractly bettering the world through efficient resource/money allocation, especially for developing countries.
  - tormeh 12y ago
    >others will argue that GS is abstractly bettering the world through efficient resource/money allocation, especially for developing countries This would be true if GS didn't scam people, which they do. I accept the investment allocation argument, but I'm not convinced that it's valid for GS specifically. EDIT: Holy shit, that controversies section just goes on and on. I just checked, and it's 7000 words long. This company's insane.
    - cheepin 12y ago
      "that controversies section just goes on and on. I just checked, and it's 7000 words long. This company's insane." That's what I was thinking. That's an awful lot of smoke if there's no fire.
  - PhantomGremlin 12y ago
    some people will think that GS is not working on 'good' problems that better the world Nonsense. Lloyd Blankfein, the CEO of Goldman, is on record that the company is just "doing God’s work". http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/goldman-chief-says-he-is-just-doing-gods-work/ http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2009/11/09/goldman-chief-says-he... /sarcasm
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- LLWM 12y ago
  Because a lot of people are desperate to rationalize not being employed there.
- beeworker 12y ago
  Anything that even smells like the financial and banking industry is considered shady by a lot of people, not just programmers, after our Great Recession. A necessary evil at best, and for programmers one that pays very well. In any case, it was a good zing.
- jbob2000 12y ago
  They have way too much power as a private organization. I think that kind of power scares people. One bad commit and the world's economy crashes.
- chrisbennet 12y ago
  Google "goldman starvation" for one such example.
- cwyers 12y ago
  I first heard about the programmer mentioned in this article in Michael Lewis' "Flash Boys," which goes into great detail about how places like Goldman let high-frequency trading firms into their "dark pool" to make money off arbitrage by being able to make orders faster than anyone else, and then steering their customers into their dark pools rather than executing the trades in the way most beneficial to their customers. I find that sort of thing to be rather unethical at best -- if I hire a broker, I expect them to buy and sell stocks in the way that best benefits me, not whichever one benefits some high-frequency trading firm the most.
  - sz4kerto 12y ago
    > if I hire a broker, I expect them to buy and sell stocks in the way that best benefits me, not whichever one benefits some high-frequency trading firm the most. This is not just the ethical way, this is the only legal approach. As a broker, you can't frontrun, etc.
    - tptacek 12y ago
      I don't feel like I remember _Flash Boys_ making a case that GS was frontrunning its clients. In fact, the book I read was trying to make a case that the giant banks (and their clients) were victims of small shady HFT firms.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    Nobody I've ever talked to that has worked in trading thinks _Flash Boys_ is a good book. There's a whole other book written as a rebuttal to it that is chock full of the technical details that Lewis' book lacks: http://www.amazon.com/Flash-Boys-Insiders-Perspective-High-Frequency-ebook/dp/B00P0QI2M2 http://www.amazon.com/Flash-Boys-Insiders-Perspective-High-F... --- and, if you haven't read it (do! it's great!), know that the objections aren't about the morality tale Lewis is trying to tell, but rather that none of the details of his case against HFT actually make any sense. Another good book that is recommended constantly in these threads is _Dark Pools_. Dark Pools is also a great sort of rags-to-riches story about the emergence of the most important electronic markets from tiny startups; it's a good read.

rayiner 12y ago

On most days I feel like you should never be able to get jail time for a crime that doesn't involve physical violence.

angersock 12y ago
rayiner...are...are you feeling alright? anything we can do?
- tptacek 12y ago
  I don't know if this a playful inside joke you and Rayiner share, but if it's a jab, it's a pretty annoying and superficial one.
  - angersock 12y ago
    Usual posts by rayiner tend to be rather conservative, and oftentimes, rather pro-government. Seeing him arguing for something rather out of character is the joke. If you go back and look at his post history, you'll see some things going either way--but I don't think that makes the joke any less funny. I use different things when poking fun at you. :)
    - tptacek 12y ago
      We should be a little more careful about assuming we can project entire ideologies onto people from their comments. I think it's probably pretty apparent why I'm sore about that point. Sorry to make a thing out of it though.
      - angersock 12y ago
        I think it's fine to model people's ideologies according to their comments, so long as we are able to adapt that model when new data happens. Similarly, if we consistently comment in ways that don't match our ideology, we shouldn't be upset when people draw incorrect conclusions about us. Anyways, no harm done...it's just a few pg funbucks.

sz4kerto 12y ago

That sounds like his job description. Obviously this is an exaggeration but GS essentially played against their own clients in many cases. Edit: (There are stuff on the net about this, like http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/26/goldman-sachs-emails-firm_n_552464.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/04/26/goldman-sachs-email..., but many of us know this system from the inside :) ).

rhino369 12y ago

We'd throw people in jail for stealing your car, why not for stealing very valuable trade secrets?

hueving 12y ago
A car is rivalrous. A trade secret is not.
- tedunangst 12y ago
  How is a secret not rivalrous? If everybody knows it, it's not a secret.
  - dredmorbius 12y ago
    Value-through-exclusivity doesn't mean that the entity itself is rivalrous. Take my car, and now you have my car and I don't. Take my trade secret, and now both of us have it. I haven't lost the knowledge itself. The value may well have declined, however. That very point was made by Thomas Jefferson on patents: "If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property, it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of every one, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me." http://www.businessinsider.com/thomas-jefferson-on-patents-2011-7?op=1 http://www.businessinsider.com/thomas-jefferson-on-patents-2...
    - tedunangst 12y ago
      I think "stealing a trade secret" is a reasonable shorthand for "stealing the exclusivity, thereby reducing the value, of a trade secret".

lucozade 12y ago

He will have willfully broken the terms of his contract. That's generally considered illegal and GS should have a fairly strong civil case against him given what the defence has admitted to. Can't for the life of me think why this should be a criminal case though. Not sure how the American people are served by a conviction.

fweespeech 12y ago
Yeah, that is my problem with it. It isn't a criminal case, just a civil one.
fastball 12y ago
Is "illegal" not generally reserved for criminal law? Sure, he broke his contract, and yes, that is grounds for a civil suit. But I'm not sure I would call it "illegal".
- dmix 12y ago
  It is still technically in violation of a (civil) law so it could be considered illegal. But agreed, typically illegal is most often used in the context of criminal matters.

a8da6b0c91d 12y ago

I have the strong sense that the New York court system, both federal and state, are particularly corrupt. The NYC based bankers all look out for each other. If you're plugged into the financial scene at the right levels in the NYC area, you're untouchable, and anyone who affronts you is going down. How else can you explain John Corzine is still walking free and Madoff was never arrested for years despite many people screaming there was an obvious fraud? Why do you think they had to extradite some guy all the way from London in their search for a scapegoat for the Flash Crash? These people have a mutual protection gang going.

PhantomGremlin 12y ago
How else can you explain John Corzine is still walking free I'm sure you know this, but for others not following so closely: the commodities broker for the "guy" from London was MF Global, the sleazy firm that Corzine was running during the Flash Crash So now they are trying to extradite a minnow, but the scum heading MF Global have so far avoided any fallout. As Wiki puts it[1]: "Crimes have been committed here without a doubt. We think there are enough facts out here to start arresting people and start filing charges." However, by August 2012, criminal investigators had concluded that charges against Corzine, or any other of MF Global's former executives or employees would be unlikely. MF Global allowed some clown trading out of his house to place orders for billions of dollars of futures contracts. If any reasonable percentage of those had been filled, the disruption to the markets would have been enormous. Not only did the "guy" in London not have enough capital to place those orders, they were big enough that MF Global itself didn't have enough capital. Of course, MF Global shortly later turned out to be a shell game, so maybe all that would have happened is they would have blown up a few months earlier. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MF_Global#April_2012:_Possible_Criminal.2C_Civil_Actions_Against_Executives.2C_Employees https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MF_Global#April_2012:_Possible...