13 ms·

No. The most interesting part is that this is an example of a vindictive employer ruining someone's life. I used to work at Goldman's and can tell you that th

by tpatke 11y ago

No. The most interesting part is that this is an example of a vindictive employer ruining someone's life. I used to work at Goldman's and can tell you that they are paranoid about this kind of thing. They are trying to make an example out of Sergey. We used to get daily updates (on the corporate intranet) about the progress of the case. There is no telling how much money Goldman's has spent going after this guy. Both directly and indirectly through lobbying. You have to ask why, after a year in jail with no conviction, the government still trying to prosecute him? Could it be because Goldman has a very powerful lobbying arm which is particularly strong in New York? If you are leaving your employer, don't upload any code. Sure. ...but that was over 6 years ago and the guy has already done time. Try getting a job with a prison record. I can tell you that in the banking industry it will not happen. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if they keep coming after him. Poor guy. One last point. There is no market for stolen code. If I stole Google's search algorithm, who would I sell it to? Microsoft wouldn't be interested and it is not like you can take out an ad on ebay. Who would have the brains to figure it out? If you had those brains, wouldn't it be easier to just write it yourself? What is true for Google's code is also true for any complex system such as trading software.

frozenport 11y ago
>>If you had those brains, wouldn't it be easier to just write it yourself? Except it takes months to recreate code. Much easier for you to walk up to your boss and show them a working prototype after a week of refactoring.
- monsterix 11y ago
  > Except it takes months to recreate code. No. For a neanderthal leadership it doesn't take months to recreate code. It usually takes forever. Goldman Sachs and many such large corporation, including the US Government, are led by a bunch of dinosaurs. People who do not understand what code is. What they understand instead is bullying, setting an example like some sort of public execution, owning people to the point of slavery etc. They know what it means to prosecute and destroy lives of individuals. And enjoy parties and drinks on the side in the evenings. And this is just one example of that tyrannical trait.
  - frozenport 11y ago
    Maybe we are both right? GS are terrible people, but the code he stole could help him future work?
    - monsterix 11y ago
      Yep!
knodi123 11y ago
> What is true for Google's code is also true for any complex system such as trading software. I'm not sure that follows. Many trading companies operate as black boxes, and there are a hell of a lot more of them, and they have much fewer employees, and seem to exemplify a "get rich quick" attitude.
andrewflnr 11y ago
You would sell it to someone interested in gaming it.
chongli 11y ago
One last point. There is no market for stolen code. If I stole Google's search algorithm, who would I sell it to? Google's search algorithm might not be very marketable but I can think of tons of different uses for stolen proprietary trading algorithms. The potential for inflicting enormous economic damage is very real.
- mathattack 11y ago
  If the code allows someone to generate positive returns, then there is a tremendous market for it if the person who writes it comes with. (I do believe the value of code drops dramatically if the person who write it is gone) In this case, the person could take the code and generate money for another fund. This doesn't mean that GS is doing the right thing going crazy after him, rather it's just an explanation that he could make money with it elsewhere.
  - chongli 11y ago
    This doesn't mean that GS is doing the right thing going crazy after him Oh yeah. There's a big difference between doing the right thing and doing what's in GS's best interests.
    - mathattack 11y ago
      Yes - this applies to countries too. High morality doesn't always map 1 to 1 with interests, as much as people try to make it seem the case. :-)
- x5n1 11y ago
  You mean like the banks usually do. Carry on.
DMac87 11y ago
Really? Someone who worked at GS probably wouldn't refer to it as "Goldman's"... just sayin'
gcv 11y ago
One thing about this case puzzles me, and none of the news coverage I found explains it: what code did he actually take?! Details matter. Was it a tweak of something like Samba (obviously GPL)? Or was it part of a proprietary risk management system, derivatives models, or other direct money-making programs? If he took the former, then I'd side with him — he took nothing of genuine value. If he took the latter, then, très uncool. (I witnessed several incidents of model theft while serving time on Wall Street in the mid-2000s, and none were publicly pursued like this one.)
- j_baker 11y ago
  What he took was proprietary infrastructure-related code that didn't involve any of Goldman's trading algorithms. His claim is that it was so tangled up with the open source code he wanted that he had to take it out to get it.
- jkimmel 11y ago
  In Flash Boys, he makes it clear that he did not take any trading strategies or in-house models. They don't provide a ton of detail in the book, but it seems that he wanted to take some FOSS code he modified himself while at Goldman. All code ever used on a Goldman machine is licensed as proprietary, even if it was downloaded from a FOSS repository 1 µs beforehand. It's mentioned that some irrelevant infrastructure code may have been intermingled with the modified FOSS he took, though it doesn't seem Goldman was particularly incensed by any particular piece of code, simply by the fact that he took any to begin with. Also in the book, Michael Lewis brings together a panel of HFT technologists to interview Sergey and assess whether anything he took was consequential. Their collective conclusion after meeting with him for several hours was that he took absolutely nothing of value.
  - jsprogrammer 11y ago
    How does Goldman relicense FOSS software as their own proprietary software?
    - jkimmel 11y ago
pitnips 11y ago
You worked at GS but call it Goldman's?
- elektromekatron 11y ago
  Perhaps tpatke knows that using the term GS would be much harder to parse for folk that have not worked there. I work for FWE, by the way.
  - acqq 11y ago
    I can imagine that, still, how come "Goldman's" with the 's? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs It isn't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald%27s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald%27s
    - scrumper 11y ago
      Likely British usage. We pluralize company names in many cases: Goldmans, Tescos, etc, and refer to them plurally (so, "Goldmans are seeking to ruin Sergey" vs. "Goldman is seeking..."). Apostrophe is probably wrong :)
      - acqq 11y ago
        So would a Briton say "I used to work at Goldmans" if the company is called Goldman Sachs?
        scrumper 11y ago
        Yes, exactly. Same with Lehmans, Merrills, etc. Mostly companies named after people.
        pests 11y ago
        In southeast Michigan its also standard for people to append an `s` to the end of most stores. Kroger -> Krogers Meijer -> Meijers etc. I never noticed it until I went on a linguistics bender on Wikipedia where it was noted.
merpnderp 11y ago
There is no market for stolen code. Microsoft might not be interested, but every SEO company out their would be.
arbitrage314 11y ago
My best friend works at Goldman, and used to sit next to Sergey. Three things: 1. There were definitely NOT daily updates about the progress of this case 2. He WAS absolutely trying to steal code. Goldman high-frequency code isn't great (except in options market making). The thing that ultimately flagged him was that he kept trying to clear his .history file. 3. He wasn't planning on selling it. He was planning on taking it to Teza, a place that has a notorious reputation for poaching people and code.
- psykovsky 11y ago
  Do you have any proof, or do we have to believe the word of someone who belive's the word of someone else, who in his turn is unknown?
  - arbitrage314 11y ago
    Haha your point is obviously valid. Without outing my friend, I can't prove it, so I hope you'll believe me. In fact, even if you don't believe me, that's okay--Goldman Sachs deserves to be given some crap!
    - enraged_camel 11y ago
      What you wrote above is basically hearsay, which is not allowed as evidence in the United States (barring some exceptions). Not sure why it should hold any weight on an online discussion forum.
      - gotrecruit 11y ago
        you're really equating the credibility of an online discussion forum with that of a court of justice?
- tpatke 11y ago
  >NOT daily updates This was an exaggeration that I did not think would be taken literally. We had updates as the case progressed. I would guess about once a month. These updates were on the corporate intranet home page which generally contained about 5 links to 'external news' or something. >He WAS absolutely trying to steal code. Goldman high-frequency code isn't great... You have written this in a weird way. I agree he was trying to steal code. The quality of what he stole is not relevant. The way you have written this, it could be read: "He tried to steal high-frequency code". This is very much debatable. I could easily argue that Log4J is part of Goldman's high-frequency code. He did try to cover his tracks. What he did was wrong and he knew at the time it was wrong. Six years later, does the punishment fit the crime? >He wasn't planning on selling it. He was planning on taking it to Teza Yes. This is the interesting point. He wasn't planning on selling it because there is no market for it. By this, I mean that there is no place he could list the code for purchase because: 1. It would be illegal and other companies frown on that kind of thing (at least on paper). 2. The code would not be worth much without an understanding of what it does in the wider ecosystem. Point two is key. Sergey understood the code. He was uploading it to help him remember the work he had done at Goldman's. There is very much a market for, "I did XYZ at Goldman's, I can do it for you too." I have no doubt that he would have been able to do it again without the source code, but he wanted his 'notes'. GS didn't want him to apply his trade at another firm. Hence the 'vindictive employer' remark. How long before another developer gets harassed by Goldman's because they printed off some technical documentation before leaving? What if the documentation is printed a month before leaving? ...a year? ...where is the line, exactly?
learnstats2 11y ago
> One last point. There is no market for stolen code. If I stole Google's search algorithm, who would I sell it to? Microsoft would not buy it because that would be illegal on their part as well. However, if I can reverse engineer Google's code, I can put myself at the top of the search rankings. Sell that, rather than selling the code.
SonicSoul 11y ago
from Bloomberg[1] "Under cross-examination by Assistant District Attorney Elizabeth Roper, Malyshev said that Aleynikov would have been the second-highest paid person at Teza, and that he was the only employee that he had offered to pay three times a former salary" I can't find a citation, but he was worth that much to Teza precisely because of the HF trading models he was bringing with him. I've worked at hedge funds where quants did have rights to their own trading algorithms and under their agreement they could leave and take them to the next shop. If Sergey did not have such agreement, taking anything (even his own code) would be considered company property. I am not familiar enough to say he did or didn't steal company property, but I would certainly not say that "there is no market for stolen code". If all he really took was open source code than this is indeed a witch hunt, but I don't see why any company would pay so much if they could just get the free open source code. [1] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-21/goldman-code-theft-defense-rests-after-calling-two-witnesses http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-21/goldman-co...
- wolfgke 11y ago
  > I am not familiar enough to say he did or didn't steal company property, but I would certainly not say that "there is no market for stolen code". He hasn't stolen anything (since the source code is still on GS' computers), he just copied it illegaly. Using the word "stealing" for this is plain propaganda. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4 [Copying Is Not Theft]
jacquesm 11y ago
If you can't think of buyers for Googles secret sauce you should think again, just about every two-bit SEO guru would be willing to pay for that (assuming they could understand it) to be able to better game the system. Obviously this has value.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
rhino369 11y ago
>There is no market for stolen code. If I stole Google's search algorithm, who would I sell it to? Microsoft wouldn't be interested and it is not like you can take out an ad on ebay This is just not the case. Google "sued trade secret misappropriation." The classic example is a company hiring someone with a wink and nod and they bring over all sorts of stolen documents.
dlandis 11y ago
Yeah, I'm still not feeling much sympathy for him though. He did 11 months for a premeditated theft for which he tried to cover his tracks. Is that too harsh? Of course they're going to go after him. And you're worried about him getting another job?? I don't get it.

by tpatke 11y ago

frozenport 11y ago

>>If you had those brains, wouldn't it be easier to just write it yourself? Except it takes months to recreate code. Much easier for you to walk up to your boss and show them a working prototype after a week of refactoring.

monsterix 11y ago
> Except it takes months to recreate code. No. For a neanderthal leadership it doesn't take months to recreate code. It usually takes forever. Goldman Sachs and many such large corporation, including the US Government, are led by a bunch of dinosaurs. People who do not understand what code is. What they understand instead is bullying, setting an example like some sort of public execution, owning people to the point of slavery etc. They know what it means to prosecute and destroy lives of individuals. And enjoy parties and drinks on the side in the evenings. And this is just one example of that tyrannical trait.
- frozenport 11y ago
  Maybe we are both right? GS are terrible people, but the code he stole could help him future work?
  - monsterix 11y ago
    Yep!

knodi123 11y ago

> What is true for Google's code is also true for any complex system such as trading software. I'm not sure that follows. Many trading companies operate as black boxes, and there are a hell of a lot more of them, and they have much fewer employees, and seem to exemplify a "get rich quick" attitude.

andrewflnr 11y ago

You would sell it to someone interested in gaming it.

chongli 11y ago

One last point. There is no market for stolen code. If I stole Google's search algorithm, who would I sell it to? Google's search algorithm might not be very marketable but I can think of tons of different uses for stolen proprietary trading algorithms. The potential for inflicting enormous economic damage is very real.

mathattack 11y ago
If the code allows someone to generate positive returns, then there is a tremendous market for it if the person who writes it comes with. (I do believe the value of code drops dramatically if the person who write it is gone) In this case, the person could take the code and generate money for another fund. This doesn't mean that GS is doing the right thing going crazy after him, rather it's just an explanation that he could make money with it elsewhere.
- chongli 11y ago
  This doesn't mean that GS is doing the right thing going crazy after him Oh yeah. There's a big difference between doing the right thing and doing what's in GS's best interests.
  - mathattack 11y ago
    Yes - this applies to countries too. High morality doesn't always map 1 to 1 with interests, as much as people try to make it seem the case. :-)
x5n1 11y ago
You mean like the banks usually do. Carry on.

DMac87 11y ago

Really? Someone who worked at GS probably wouldn't refer to it as "Goldman's"... just sayin'

gcv 11y ago

One thing about this case puzzles me, and none of the news coverage I found explains it: what code did he actually take?! Details matter. Was it a tweak of something like Samba (obviously GPL)? Or was it part of a proprietary risk management system, derivatives models, or other direct money-making programs? If he took the former, then I'd side with him — he took nothing of genuine value. If he took the latter, then, très uncool. (I witnessed several incidents of model theft while serving time on Wall Street in the mid-2000s, and none were publicly pursued like this one.)

j_baker 11y ago
What he took was proprietary infrastructure-related code that didn't involve any of Goldman's trading algorithms. His claim is that it was so tangled up with the open source code he wanted that he had to take it out to get it.
jkimmel 11y ago
In Flash Boys, he makes it clear that he did not take any trading strategies or in-house models. They don't provide a ton of detail in the book, but it seems that he wanted to take some FOSS code he modified himself while at Goldman. All code ever used on a Goldman machine is licensed as proprietary, even if it was downloaded from a FOSS repository 1 µs beforehand. It's mentioned that some irrelevant infrastructure code may have been intermingled with the modified FOSS he took, though it doesn't seem Goldman was particularly incensed by any particular piece of code, simply by the fact that he took any to begin with. Also in the book, Michael Lewis brings together a panel of HFT technologists to interview Sergey and assess whether anything he took was consequential. Their collective conclusion after meeting with him for several hours was that he took absolutely nothing of value.
- jsprogrammer 11y ago
  How does Goldman relicense FOSS software as their own proprietary software?
  - jkimmel 11y ago

pitnips 11y ago

You worked at GS but call it Goldman's?

elektromekatron 11y ago
Perhaps tpatke knows that using the term GS would be much harder to parse for folk that have not worked there. I work for FWE, by the way.
- acqq 11y ago
  I can imagine that, still, how come "Goldman's" with the 's? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldman_Sachs It isn't: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald%27s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonald%27s
  - scrumper 11y ago
    Likely British usage. We pluralize company names in many cases: Goldmans, Tescos, etc, and refer to them plurally (so, "Goldmans are seeking to ruin Sergey" vs. "Goldman is seeking..."). Apostrophe is probably wrong :)
    - acqq 11y ago
      So would a Briton say "I used to work at Goldmans" if the company is called Goldman Sachs?
      - scrumper 11y ago
        Yes, exactly. Same with Lehmans, Merrills, etc. Mostly companies named after people.
      - pests 11y ago
        In southeast Michigan its also standard for people to append an `s` to the end of most stores. Kroger -> Krogers Meijer -> Meijers etc. I never noticed it until I went on a linguistics bender on Wikipedia where it was noted.

merpnderp 11y ago

There is no market for stolen code. Microsoft might not be interested, but every SEO company out their would be.

arbitrage314 11y ago

My best friend works at Goldman, and used to sit next to Sergey. Three things: 1. There were definitely NOT daily updates about the progress of this case 2. He WAS absolutely trying to steal code. Goldman high-frequency code isn't great (except in options market making). The thing that ultimately flagged him was that he kept trying to clear his .history file. 3. He wasn't planning on selling it. He was planning on taking it to Teza, a place that has a notorious reputation for poaching people and code.

psykovsky 11y ago
Do you have any proof, or do we have to believe the word of someone who belive's the word of someone else, who in his turn is unknown?
- arbitrage314 11y ago
  Haha your point is obviously valid. Without outing my friend, I can't prove it, so I hope you'll believe me. In fact, even if you don't believe me, that's okay--Goldman Sachs deserves to be given some crap!
  - enraged_camel 11y ago
    What you wrote above is basically hearsay, which is not allowed as evidence in the United States (barring some exceptions). Not sure why it should hold any weight on an online discussion forum.
    - gotrecruit 11y ago
      you're really equating the credibility of an online discussion forum with that of a court of justice?
tpatke 11y ago
>NOT daily updates This was an exaggeration that I did not think would be taken literally. We had updates as the case progressed. I would guess about once a month. These updates were on the corporate intranet home page which generally contained about 5 links to 'external news' or something. >He WAS absolutely trying to steal code. Goldman high-frequency code isn't great... You have written this in a weird way. I agree he was trying to steal code. The quality of what he stole is not relevant. The way you have written this, it could be read: "He tried to steal high-frequency code". This is very much debatable. I could easily argue that Log4J is part of Goldman's high-frequency code. He did try to cover his tracks. What he did was wrong and he knew at the time it was wrong. Six years later, does the punishment fit the crime? >He wasn't planning on selling it. He was planning on taking it to Teza Yes. This is the interesting point. He wasn't planning on selling it because there is no market for it. By this, I mean that there is no place he could list the code for purchase because: 1. It would be illegal and other companies frown on that kind of thing (at least on paper). 2. The code would not be worth much without an understanding of what it does in the wider ecosystem. Point two is key. Sergey understood the code. He was uploading it to help him remember the work he had done at Goldman's. There is very much a market for, "I did XYZ at Goldman's, I can do it for you too." I have no doubt that he would have been able to do it again without the source code, but he wanted his 'notes'. GS didn't want him to apply his trade at another firm. Hence the 'vindictive employer' remark. How long before another developer gets harassed by Goldman's because they printed off some technical documentation before leaving? What if the documentation is printed a month before leaving? ...a year? ...where is the line, exactly?

learnstats2 11y ago

> One last point. There is no market for stolen code. If I stole Google's search algorithm, who would I sell it to? Microsoft would not buy it because that would be illegal on their part as well. However, if I can reverse engineer Google's code, I can put myself at the top of the search rankings. Sell that, rather than selling the code.

SonicSoul 11y ago

from Bloomberg[1] "Under cross-examination by Assistant District Attorney Elizabeth Roper, Malyshev said that Aleynikov would have been the second-highest paid person at Teza, and that he was the only employee that he had offered to pay three times a former salary" I can't find a citation, but he was worth that much to Teza precisely because of the HF trading models he was bringing with him. I've worked at hedge funds where quants did have rights to their own trading algorithms and under their agreement they could leave and take them to the next shop. If Sergey did not have such agreement, taking anything (even his own code) would be considered company property. I am not familiar enough to say he did or didn't steal company property, but I would certainly not say that "there is no market for stolen code". If all he really took was open source code than this is indeed a witch hunt, but I don't see why any company would pay so much if they could just get the free open source code. [1] http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-21/goldman-code-theft-defense-rests-after-calling-two-witnesses http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-04-21/goldman-co...

wolfgke 11y ago
> I am not familiar enough to say he did or didn't steal company property, but I would certainly not say that "there is no market for stolen code". He hasn't stolen anything (since the source code is still on GS' computers), he just copied it illegaly. Using the word "stealing" for this is plain propaganda. > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeTybKL1pM4 [Copying Is Not Theft]

jacquesm 11y ago

If you can't think of buyers for Googles secret sauce you should think again, just about every two-bit SEO guru would be willing to pay for that (assuming they could understand it) to be able to better game the system. Obviously this has value.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

rhino369 11y ago

>There is no market for stolen code. If I stole Google's search algorithm, who would I sell it to? Microsoft wouldn't be interested and it is not like you can take out an ad on ebay This is just not the case. Google "sued trade secret misappropriation." The classic example is a company hiring someone with a wink and nod and they bring over all sorts of stolen documents.

dlandis 11y ago

Yeah, I'm still not feeling much sympathy for him though. He did 11 months for a premeditated theft for which he tried to cover his tracks. Is that too harsh? Of course they're going to go after him. And you're worried about him getting another job?? I don't get it.