12 ms·

Excerpt from ‘Flash Boys’ about Serge Aleynikov and Goldman Sachs

335 points by peterbotond 12y ago

zx2c4 12y ago
> He deleted his bash history— the commands he had typed into his own Goldman computer keyboard. To access the computer, he was required to type his password . If he didn’t delete his bash history, his password would be there to see, for anyone who had access to the system. Wait, what?
- nmrm 12y ago
  $> some_command --username myusername --password mypassword $> history ... 12345 some_command --username myusername --password mypassword This comes up fairly often with poorly designed CLI's. Wiping your bash history after running the command isn't an unreasaonble hack. Edit/Addendum: Although there are other (perhaps better) ways to achieve the same effect, the main point is that doing a "history -c" should be considered no more suspicious than e.g. closing a document to clear your "undo" history.
  - zx2c4 12y ago
    Fair enough. Though, read -p "Password: " -s password; some_command --username myusername --password "$password"
    - 0x0 12y ago
      Although this avoid a .bash_history entry, this will still make the password visible to "ps ax" on most multi-user systems.
  - NoodleIncident 12y ago
    A space before the command stops it from going in your history, though.
    - ewams 12y ago
      is that only for certain distro's because that isnt true on debian: 115 history 116 history (1 space) 117 history (2 spaces) 118 man passwd 119 passwd -a (1 space) 120 history 121 passwd -a (2 spaces) 122 history
      - paxswill 12y ago
        It's controlled by the HISTCONTROL variable in bash. If it contains 'ignorespace' (or 'ignoreboth' to ignore duplicates as well). Check the man page for more details.
        judk 12y ago
        Anyone know why this incredible hack was introduced in hr first place? In my entire career this "feature" had only caused annoyance after copy-pasting a command. Why not have a shell command called 'nohist' to wrap a command line?
      - puls 12y ago
        You can control this with the HISTCONTROL and HISTIGNORE environment variables: http://askubuntu.com/questions/15926/how-to-avoid-duplicate-entries-in-bash-history http://askubuntu.com/questions/15926/how-to-avoid-duplicate-...
        judk 12y ago
        Thank you for providing something of technical value in this conversation.
      - dfc 12y ago
        Much to my dismay this is not true. By default debian is configured to `ignoreboth` ie dupes and spaces. Like you I also change the debian default for HISTCONTROL. Lines 11-13 of /etc/skel/.bashrc:[^1] # don't put duplicate lines or lines starting with space in the history. # See bash(1) for more options HISTCONTROL=ignoreboth [^1]: https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~doko/+junk/pkg-bash-debian/view/head:/skel.bashrc#L11 https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~doko/+junk/pkg-bash-debian/vie... Provenance for /etc/skel/.bashrc: dfc@ronin:~$ dlocate /etc/skel/ bash: /etc/skel/.bash_logout bash: /etc/skel/.bashrc bash: /etc/skel/.profile dfc@ronin:~$ apt-cache showsrc bash |grep ^Vcs- Vcs-Browser: https://code.launchpad.net/~doko/+junk/pkg-bash-debian Vcs-Bzr: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~doko/+junk/pkg-bash-debian
- dolzenko 12y ago
  Exactly my feeling, this just doesn't make sense, if he was so paranoid about his password being stolen it's unreasonable to rely on something like "remember to remove the shell history on logout". Then he also uploads the code to some random SVN server...
fenollp 12y ago
Reminds me of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Aleynikov http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Aleynikov
- DieBuche 12y ago
  Did you even read it? It's about him.
- pmorici 12y ago
  Probably because that is who this is about.
ig1 12y ago
Flagged because article completely misunderstands how GPL works. GPL doesn't apply if you modify source-code to use internally, it only applies if you distribute it externally to third party users. [GPL not mentioned in article; my recollection from the original court documents is that the code was largely LGPL and GPL code]
- ntakasaki 12y ago
  I believe the article didn't imply steal in the legal sense, but rather in the moral sense of not contributing changes back and assuming ownership. I also see no mention of the GPL, only open source. So the license could've been BSD or MPL etc. Also this part might be illegal: >Later, at his trial, his lawyer flashed two pages of computer code: the original, with its open source license on top, and a replica, with the open source license stripped off and replaced by the Goldman Sachs license.
  - zanny 12y ago
    The latter is obviously illegal, but I am an advocate of the GPL and don't take issue with someone extending GPLed code for internal use and not releasing their changes. The point is to maintain user freedom of software, and if the users are the company itself modifying it and never distributing it to someone without source access, even if they never make it publicly available, that is still ethical. I'd like them to share the information they create, but I think it steps on others rights if you start trying to force disclosure of information creation.
- pmorici 12y ago
  That's not inherently true of open source and I didn't see where the article singled out a specific license. There are several variants of GPL the AGPL has clauses that say you still have to provide source in cases short of distribution of the software itself.
  - Mikeb85 12y ago
    Yes but AGPL is rarely used, the vast majority of FOSS uses GPL or a less restrictive license...
ntakasaki 12y ago
Continuing the story from his Wiki page: In March 2011, Aleynikov appealed the conviction, asking the Second Circuit to review the District Court's decision denying his original motion to dismiss the indictment for failure to state a claim.[9] On February 16, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit heard oral argument on his appeal and, later that same day, unanimously ordered his conviction reversed and a judgment of acquittal entered, with opinion to follow.[10] Aleynikov was released from custody the next day. On April 11, 2012, Dennis Jacobs, Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals, published a unanimous decision in a written opinion[10] stating: On appeal, Aleynikov argues, inter alia, that his conduct did not constitute an offense under either statute. He argues that: [1] the source code was not a "stolen" "good" within the meaning of the NSPA, and [2] the source code was not “related to or included in a product that is produced for or placed in interstate or foreign commerce” within the meaning of the EEA. We agree, and reverse the judgment of the district court.[9] In the course of these events, Aleynikov has spent 11 months in prison. Aleynikov has divorced, lost his savings, and his career is ruined.[11] The government did not seek reconsideration of the Second Circuit's ruling, thus ending federal action against Aleynikov.[12]
- dm2 12y ago
  I'm guessing that there isn't any legal recourse (monetary) for him from Goldman Sachs and the FBI ruining his life. Should there be? Goldman Sachs had every right to request that he be prosecuted, but no matter how the case turned out, his life would be ruined. I don't know of a good solution to this issue, but it just seems very wrong. I'm sure there have been countless instances of this happening though. Maybe a good solution would be to lessen the penalties for this type of crime. Maybe a legal requirement for a public apology and for the prosecutor to have to pay back legal costs? A portion of this restitution should come out of that courts budget or the department that perused the case without doing their due diligence. Did Sergey sign something saying that he could never remove code from the building or use it in another project? I'm not sure that it simply being company policy is enough, in my opinion. Has anyone here ever taken code from one employer with the intent of using it again if needed, simply to save time and not having to duplicate research? Should you be considered a criminal for that? Should you have to pay back the time the company paid you to write that code? It seems like the lessons are: 1) Don't talk to police, even if you did nothing wrong and they tell you they are on your side. Lawyer up. 2) Don't steal code, but if you do then encrypt it and put it on a portable media device. Uploading to a foreign SVN repository using the companies network wasn't very smart, don't do that. 3) Ensure that your employees know the company's policy on removing code from the premises. It seems pretty obvious but I believe that Sergey honestly didn't think he was doing anything wrong.
gflateman 12y ago
flash boys also talks about the FBI's suspicion when they heard Aleynikov was using software called 'subversion', and assuming he was thus doing something 'subversive' that cracked me up!
ithought 12y ago
His federal conviction was overturned then they later recharged him for the same incident in state court. Also Congressman Lamar Smith, who sponsored SOPA, amended the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 with the Theft of Trade Secrets Clarification Act of 2012 specifically related to this case. Sergey's Legal Defense Fund - http://www.aleynikov.org/ http://www.aleynikov.org/
yukichan 12y ago
This sucks, but seriously never talk to the police. Don't write anything down. Don't say anything. Don't sign anything. Tell them your name and otherwise just stay silent. They are never trying to help you, they're trying to close their case.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- malloreon 12y ago
  Obligatory: "Don't talk to cops" - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik
  - notastartup 12y ago
    Man, that was some informative video. I was shocked to learn innocent people get convicted because they talked to the cops. It's clear to me that doing such thing cannot do anything positive, it can only do negative. I'd love to attend that guy's lecture (what school is this? what is his name?), it's informative, he's funny. Makes me want to retake the LSAT.
    - yukichan 12y ago
      > I was shocked to learn innocent people get convicted because they talked to the cops. You should read up on Project Innocence casefiles: http://www.innocenceproject.org/know/ http://www.innocenceproject.org/know/ Dennis Fritz in particular, he volunteered to give hair samples which were used to create circumstantial evidence against him: http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Dennis_Fritz.php http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Dennis_Fritz.php Had he not done that, had he not gone in to talk voluntarily to the police he probably would not have lost 11 years of his life, lost seeing his daughter grow up. All for talking with the police. Do not talk to the police. The cost can be unimaginably high.
      - notastartup 12y ago
mcv 12y ago
Old story. Definitely sucks for him, but mailing yourself proprietary code of a very secretive and ruthless bank is not exactly the smartest thing to do.
fredgrott 12y ago
the problem I have with the article is that FOSS/OSS used internally and modified for that use and not distributed would mean under normal copyright and work rules that yes GS did own the changes to OSS/FOSS used internally but never distributed.
hynahmwxsbyb 12y ago
I wonder how much this cost Goldman from a talent perspective.
- pritambaral 12y ago
  Do you mean coders refusing to work for GS?
  - emn13 12y ago
    It would certainly make me think twice. I mean why risk jail time over a bit of petty cash?
    - mbillie1 12y ago
      Depending on who you are, half a million dollars a year is not necessarily 'petty' cash. Also, people risk jail time over petty cash constantly in all walks of life.
      - FireBeyond 12y ago
        Half a million - plus bonuses, which can often be 5-10 times your salary.
      - emn13 12y ago
        It's petty in the sense that you're likely to be able to get sufficient fraction of that not to need to worry about money. At that point if you're motivated by more cash rather than not being seriously screwed, well, you don't sounds rational to me. That cash just doesn't have much value to you, and the risk does have cost to you.
    - kllrnohj 12y ago
      You risk jail time stealing code from any company. The penalty here was disproportionate to the crime, sure, but Serge clearly took code owned by GS and uploaded it, without permission, to a 3rd party. Pretty cut and dry case of corporate theft here...
infinotize 12y ago
Amazing how naive in some regards a very smart person can be. You don't send yourself source code, and you definitely don't talk to police without a lawyer, or invite them into your house.
rdtsc 12y ago
For those that don't know, Serge is a great Erlang and C++ programmer and he contributes to open source (had some pull requests to Erlang itself). Here is his Github account: https://github.com/saleyn https://github.com/saleyn You can find his posts on Erlang's mailing list once a while. Two of his interesting project I am following: https://github.com/saleyn/erlexec https://github.com/saleyn/erlexec -- a utility to control OS process from Erlang. https://github.com/saleyn/eixx/ https://github.com/saleyn/eixx/ -- Erlang to C++ interface.
- davidw 12y ago
  I contributed several pieces of code to erlexec without having any idea of just who he was, only later realizing it when I read the Michael Lewis piece on him. He's a very friendly guy and was quite willing to work with me on the patches I contributed to erlexec.
muyuu 12y ago
Sounds to me like it was Aleynikov who didn't understand the severity of the crime he committed. I work in a similar environment and I'm fully aware that if I do something remotely like bringing my code from work home, holy crap I'm committing a very VERY serious crime and my employer would go after me as viciously as they could. Very especially if I were to be going somewhere else where this code would set me up to make a new competing engine. Pushing stuff to SVN and mailing seem innocuous... but depending on what you are actually passing around they can be extremely serious crimes.
- avoutthere 12y ago
  I have also worked in similar environments. The company policies regarding treatment of source code was spelled out very clearly in the employment contract. I imagine Goldman has a very explicit contract.
- daenz 12y ago
  Remind me to never work for an institution like that.
  - muyuu 12y ago
    Well, if they pay you high 6 figures it's not so you can take the work that you made for them (which is not yours) and use it to set up a competing product and fuck them over. It's really not that difficult to comprehend. And it's really not as bad as it sounds, if you want to work in your projects for fun, you do it in your own time. And you can still leave, it's just that if they catch you doing shit like this, it's not going to go down well.
    - loup-vaillant 12y ago
      There's more to it than the fact the code is written on behalf of your company. You have written or modified the code, so now it's part of your history. And to some extent, even a part of you. What we are isn't limited to what's inside our body and brain. The objects we interact with also count to an extent. (Being a cellist, makes me acutely aware of that.) What counts the most is any information stored in those objects, especially information you can't retrieve elsewhere —notes, journal, and other such personal data. Losing that information is like losing a memory. Being stored in a hard drive, a paper book, or a human brain doesn't make much of a difference.[1] So, when I write some code for a company, I have the right to remember it, and I will exercise that right. That's basic human dignity. If our current power structure (err, "legal system") says otherwise, then it should be reformed. On the other hand, I can restrain myself, and avoid to disclose all those memories, say, in a public SVN repository. I don't like to keep secrets, but let's face it, I already do, and it doesn't bother me too much. So, I treat corporate copyright as a form of non-disclosure agreement: I won't tell anyone. But I will remember. --- [1] looong footnote: Really it doesn't. One day, it may even make no difference at all. We don't have the technology yet, but imagine having a computer wired to our nervous system. It could act as a pair of Google glasses 5.0, or augment our intellect more directly: more working memory, more and more accurate term memories on silicon, even perfect recall. Now you can't even make the difference between neuron memories and silicon memories. They're both equally a part of you. Heck, your whole brain could be turned into silicon, it probably wouldn't make any difference. (I happen to believe in "mind uploading". I won't justify why here.) Now let an employer ask you to delete whatever copy of the code you may still hold. Now it is quite literally asking you to erase part of your memories. What exactly should you erase, anyway? Just enough to disable perfect recall? Keep whatever happens to be stored in neurons, and erase whatever is in the silicon part? What if you have stored everything about that company in silicon? (You may well have, if perfect recall makes you more productive, and requires silicon memory.) If we had the technical means right now, I believe Goldman Sachs would have us forget everything we learned while working within their walls, if not more —like in the Paycheck movie (2003). I think we can all agree it wouldn't be acceptable.
auggierose 12y ago
There is a simple solution to this. When you publish open source software, make sure that in your license it says that Goldman Sachs is not allowed to use this code for any purpose whatsoever.
- pritambaral 12y ago
  Why not throw in a lot of other "evil" entities too. Soon, we'll have jslint's license!
- optymizer 12y ago
  Rule #5 of an Open Source license: "The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons." http://opensource.org/osd-annotated http://opensource.org/osd-annotated
  - GhotiFish 12y ago
    There's nothing that stops you from actually putting that clause in your license, just don't call it the GPL or MIT or whatever. "My code is freely licensed open source, Based on GPL, with the addendum that Goldman Sachs can go stick their head in a pig" As I understand it, there is nothing preventing this from happening.
    - davidw 12y ago
      Sure, you can do it. Once you do, though, your code is not open source.
      - ntakasaki 12y ago
        >Sure, you can do it. Once you do, though, your code is not open source. It is surely open source. It's just not Open Source. An important difference because of the capitalization.
        davidw 12y ago
bayesianhorse 12y ago
Moral of the story: If you don't want to be thrown in jail for stealing something you didn't steal, don't sign a confession... In fact it sounds as if the defendant actually phrased most of the confession himself...
- dannypgh 12y ago
  I'll take it one step further: don't talk to the police at all. Had he said nothing and asked for a lawyer who knows what the outcome would have been? Obligatory: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
senthilnayagam 12y ago
so effectively Goldman Sacks killed the potential competing high performance trading platform
Mikeb85 12y ago
Read the GPL carefully, very carefully... An organisation counts the same as an individual, and as long as code stays within the organization that doesn't count as 'distribution', and Goldman Sachs is under no obligation to release the code. They even retain the rights to prevent the code being released. It's easy to hate on Goldman Sachs for many things, but in this case they didn't violate the GPL, and Aleynikov did commit a crime.
- nwmcsween 12y ago
  Ah but you cannot change the copyright of source to something else that you want, also I'm pretty sure you cannot distribute it to subsidiaries as I'm sure was done.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - jeremyjh 12y ago
    How is that you have become sure of these things?
    - Natsu 12y ago
      It's not a good idea to remove anyone's copyright notices. See, e.g., http://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2013/08/05/infringing-copyright-think-twice-before-removing-the-copyright-notice-it-could-be-deemed-copyright-management-information-under-the-dmca/ http://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2013/08/05/infringing-copyr...
      - jeremyjh 12y ago
        I didn't say that it was. I'm questioning the GP's statement that he is sure this code was shared with subsidiaries - how is that possible?
        nwmcsween 12y ago
dfc 12y ago
I don't understand this bit about the DNI: US master spy Clapper says spies steal open source, then immediately claims ownership and classifies it, and prosecutes if the material is disclosed, like Goldman Sachs. What did Clapper do?
leccine 12y ago
Lesson learned, don't ever work for Wall Street.
zorbo 12y ago
Okay, so. * misleading title. Goldman Sachs stole nothing. * This guy steals code from Goldman Sachs. * Covers his tracks. There is almost no reason why your password ever ends up in your bash history. If it does, you edit out only the password. Or you put a space before the command you run. At any rate, this guy should have known how to prevent his password from getting in the shell history and had no reason to delete his history. * The guy talks to the cops * Waves his rights to a lawyer * Signs a confession * Lets cops into his house without a search warrant. * Doesn't testify at this trial. This guy fully deserved what was coming to him. Goldman Sachs did nothing wrong here.
- rwallace 12y ago
  That's like saying if you walk down a dark alley you deserve to be mugged. It may well have been a mistake to walk down the alley, but that doesn't mean you deserved what was coming to you or that the mugger did nothing wrong.
- GhotiFish 12y ago
  >There is almost no reason why your password ever ends up in your bash history. If it does, you edit out only the password. Or you put a space before the command you run. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6475524/making-sure-commands-dont-show-up-in-bash-history http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6475524/making-sure-comma... TIL! Good tip!
- emn13 12y ago
  You're being totally unreasonable. Being naive (waiving rights, signing a "confession") doesn't mean you deserve to be abused. That's just barbaric. As to clearing bash history, this isn't criminal, it's just a wise security measure. I've certainly cleared various log files when I knew they contained exploitable credentials. Why the heck would you waste time editing out specific statements? It's not like a bash history is valuable in any normal circumstance. By the sound of it, he certainly didn't think he was doing anything wrong, otherwise he wouldn't have been helped the FBI so thoroughly. Sounds to me like nothing he did would have been a problem if he'd have been upfront about it. Basically, Goldman encouraged an atmosphere where people went it alone, implicitly (but not formally) giving them permission to do what they want as long as it gets the job done. Now, after the job got done, they change the rules and screw their employee, who by all accounts did get the job done. Frankly, if somebody needs to go to jail, it's his boss, by the sound of it.
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
FD3SA 12y ago
The programmer types were different from the trader types. The trader types were far more alive to the bigger picture, to their context. They knew their worth in the marketplace down to the last penny. They understood the connection between what they did and how much money was made , and they were good at exaggerating the importance of the link. Serge wasn’t like that. He was a little-picture person, a narrow problem solver. “I think he didn’t know his own value,” says the recruiter. This infuriates me to no end. These engineers need to be rounded up, and given a serious life lesson on the reality of markets. Knowing your product/service's worth is step 1 of any free market activity. Engineering is the only profession where the most talented engineers occupy the lowest compensation brackets with respect to their worth. All sorts of bullshit excuses are made up for this (my favorite - they're "Specialists"), but the bottom line is they are not being compensated at anywhere near what they're worth. This is why startups, and consulting firms, are so key. If the market you're trying to enter is too big for a small operation (like Wall St.), then just consult. Those 20 superstar programmers need to meet up and start a consulting firm. Then, they sell their services to these banks and charge them whatever they want (read: a lot). They then use this compensation to hire the best engineers from across the world, and keep them out of Wall St's hands. This wouldn't be too difficult, because Wall St would never match salaries because they are traders, and would die before they paid an engineer more than themselves. To all of HN: please don't underestimate your worth. It hurts everyone, including yourself.
- philbarr 12y ago
  but how do these engineers find out how much to charge if no one will tell them? and aren't they being underpaid because they are seen as replaceable?
eriktrautman 12y ago
I don't normally bring this up but in this case the site formatting is essentially unreadable for someone with poor eyesight who needs to expand the text and make the container narrow to avoid constant left/right scrolling.
zenbowman 12y ago
Goldman is a nest of parasites and vultures, do we really expect anything more from them?
- dreamdu5t 12y ago
  They are criminal co-conspirators in the capital theft of $10 billion (that we know of) from US citizens. Goldman repaid TARP loans using money given to them by the Fed by selling $11 billion of failed mortgage securities to the Fed to balance their books. We now know that more than $100 billion in MBS was purchased from Goldman by the Fed.
kayoone 12y ago
"Aleynikov was employed for two years, from May 2007 to June 2009, at Goldman at a salary of $400,000.[1] He left Goldman to join Teza Technologies, a competing trading firm which offered to triple his pay.[5]" jeez, those banks pay a pretty penny.
- cmiles74 12y ago
  This is probably the most important bit of information, in regards to Goldman Sachs' motivation. I think it is very likely that they simply did not want him working for competitors. They then searched high and low for ways to remove him form the market. The actions this guy was sued over are likely all things that he had done before.
yoamro 12y ago
Trying to sympathize with the guy, but signing a confession?....just doesn't make sense
PythonicAlpha 12y ago
That is the problem with invention vs. "intellectual property". Inventions belong to the inventor -- property belongs to the owner.
caycep 12y ago
probably OT...but Cryptome posting an excerpt from a Michael Lewis book? that's a bit out of character...
- dfc 12y ago
  Why?
  - caycep 12y ago
    My understanding is the guy that runs the site bills himself as someone who posts top secret documents, usually government or corporate, from secret or anonymous sources. Kind of like a wikileaks before wikileaks came around. For him to post an excerpt from a book you can buy on Amazon is a bit, well, anticlimactic.
    - dfc 12y ago
      You make john young sound so tacky when you say "he bills himself as..." I remember downloading things from him over my modem. He has archived tons of things over the years.
      - caycep 12y ago
        I'm not denying sometimes he has interesting and even important documents on there...just sometimes it seems a little over the top or vengeful. I would say at times, I'm glad he's doing what he's doing; at other times I get a little worried. Admittedly sometimes, it's not his fault but those of his contributors - I suppose he often puts things up unedited and verbatim and there are some that are very conspiricacy-theorist
crystaln 12y ago
So, he emailed source code to himself (yes that was illegal and violated his employment contract,) deleted the bash history (there are plenty of other ways to prevent your password from showing up in history,) waived his right to a lawyer, talked endlessly with an FBI agent and was surprised (?!) that the agent was not a computer expert, then signed a confession. Sorry if I fail to have much sympathy. If you play in the big leagues, you should at least have some sense of self preservation.
Natsu 12y ago
> On the night of his arrest, Serge waived his right to call a lawyer. [...] Then he sat down and politely tried to clear up the confusion of this FBI agent who had arrested him without an arrest warrant. These are things no sane person should do, especially if they're innocent.
kylemaxwell 12y ago
I thought the policy here was to use the actual title of the article, not to edit it. Why did the moderators change it?
- dang 12y ago
  The guidelines say to use the original title unless it is misleading or linkbait.
doktrin 12y ago
What repeatedly stands out every time I read of this account is the relative ineptitude of the federal agents handling the investigation. There appears to be every indication that agent McSwain did everything short of taking explicit marching orders from GS. The FBI either lacked the will or ability to understand the crimes they were tasked with investigating. I find that disturbing.
james-bronze 12y ago
(I'm sorry if I do this incorrectly; first time posting plus I'm on an app) "Serge tried to explain why he always erased his bash history, but McSwain had no interest in his story. “The way he did it seemed nefarious,” the FBI agent would later testify." Whom is the FBI agent referring to, McSwain or Serge?
james-bronze 12y ago
(I'm sorry if I do this incorrectly; first time posting plus I'm on an app) "Serge tried to explain why he always erased his bash history, but McSwain had no interest in his story. “The way he did it seemed nefarious,” the FBI agent would later testify." Whom is the FBI agent referring to, McSwain or Serge?
artellectual 12y ago
Seems to me here, the biggest lesson one can learn from this story is don't work for companies like Goldman Sachs. if they don't want to get with the times and understand how the world they don't understand works then they deserve to be technically behind. So on top of not understanding your work as a developer instead of learning how things work, they choose to abuse the law. Worse part is the law is like a big spider web where it traps the small guys while the tigers and elephants walk right through, there is no justice here no matter how many sections you quote or how many laws you read. Best thing is to just be smart and not get involved. There are many opportunities out there for talented developers.
ececconi 12y ago
The original link didn't mention this was an excerpt from Flash Boys so I had no clues Michael Lewis wrote it. I've never read any of his books. Now I want to because he actually writes pretty well.
notastartup 12y ago
This is batshit insane. Wall Street is fucking insane. I hope Serge wins a huge lawsuit.

335 points by peterbotond 12y ago

zx2c4 12y ago

> He deleted his bash history— the commands he had typed into his own Goldman computer keyboard. To access the computer, he was required to type his password . If he didn’t delete his bash history, his password would be there to see, for anyone who had access to the system. Wait, what?

nmrm 12y ago
$> some_command --username myusername --password mypassword $> history ... 12345 some_command --username myusername --password mypassword This comes up fairly often with poorly designed CLI's. Wiping your bash history after running the command isn't an unreasaonble hack. Edit/Addendum: Although there are other (perhaps better) ways to achieve the same effect, the main point is that doing a "history -c" should be considered no more suspicious than e.g. closing a document to clear your "undo" history.
- zx2c4 12y ago
  Fair enough. Though, read -p "Password: " -s password; some_command --username myusername --password "$password"
  - 0x0 12y ago
    Although this avoid a .bash_history entry, this will still make the password visible to "ps ax" on most multi-user systems.
- NoodleIncident 12y ago
  A space before the command stops it from going in your history, though.
  - ewams 12y ago
    is that only for certain distro's because that isnt true on debian: 115 history 116 history (1 space) 117 history (2 spaces) 118 man passwd 119 passwd -a (1 space) 120 history 121 passwd -a (2 spaces) 122 history
    - paxswill 12y ago
      It's controlled by the HISTCONTROL variable in bash. If it contains 'ignorespace' (or 'ignoreboth' to ignore duplicates as well). Check the man page for more details.
      - judk 12y ago
        Anyone know why this incredible hack was introduced in hr first place? In my entire career this "feature" had only caused annoyance after copy-pasting a command. Why not have a shell command called 'nohist' to wrap a command line?
    - puls 12y ago
      You can control this with the HISTCONTROL and HISTIGNORE environment variables: http://askubuntu.com/questions/15926/how-to-avoid-duplicate-entries-in-bash-history http://askubuntu.com/questions/15926/how-to-avoid-duplicate-...
      - judk 12y ago
        Thank you for providing something of technical value in this conversation.
    - dfc 12y ago
      Much to my dismay this is not true. By default debian is configured to `ignoreboth` ie dupes and spaces. Like you I also change the debian default for HISTCONTROL. Lines 11-13 of /etc/skel/.bashrc:[^1] # don't put duplicate lines or lines starting with space in the history. # See bash(1) for more options HISTCONTROL=ignoreboth [^1]: https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~doko/+junk/pkg-bash-debian/view/head:/skel.bashrc#L11 https://bazaar.launchpad.net/~doko/+junk/pkg-bash-debian/vie... Provenance for /etc/skel/.bashrc: dfc@ronin:~$ dlocate /etc/skel/ bash: /etc/skel/.bash_logout bash: /etc/skel/.bashrc bash: /etc/skel/.profile dfc@ronin:~$ apt-cache showsrc bash |grep ^Vcs- Vcs-Browser: https://code.launchpad.net/~doko/+junk/pkg-bash-debian Vcs-Bzr: http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~doko/+junk/pkg-bash-debian
dolzenko 12y ago
Exactly my feeling, this just doesn't make sense, if he was so paranoid about his password being stolen it's unreasonable to rely on something like "remember to remove the shell history on logout". Then he also uploads the code to some random SVN server...

fenollp 12y ago

Reminds me of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Aleynikov http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Aleynikov

DieBuche 12y ago
Did you even read it? It's about him.
pmorici 12y ago
Probably because that is who this is about.

ig1 12y ago

Flagged because article completely misunderstands how GPL works. GPL doesn't apply if you modify source-code to use internally, it only applies if you distribute it externally to third party users. [GPL not mentioned in article; my recollection from the original court documents is that the code was largely LGPL and GPL code]

ntakasaki 12y ago
I believe the article didn't imply steal in the legal sense, but rather in the moral sense of not contributing changes back and assuming ownership. I also see no mention of the GPL, only open source. So the license could've been BSD or MPL etc. Also this part might be illegal: >Later, at his trial, his lawyer flashed two pages of computer code: the original, with its open source license on top, and a replica, with the open source license stripped off and replaced by the Goldman Sachs license.
- zanny 12y ago
  The latter is obviously illegal, but I am an advocate of the GPL and don't take issue with someone extending GPLed code for internal use and not releasing their changes. The point is to maintain user freedom of software, and if the users are the company itself modifying it and never distributing it to someone without source access, even if they never make it publicly available, that is still ethical. I'd like them to share the information they create, but I think it steps on others rights if you start trying to force disclosure of information creation.
pmorici 12y ago
That's not inherently true of open source and I didn't see where the article singled out a specific license. There are several variants of GPL the AGPL has clauses that say you still have to provide source in cases short of distribution of the software itself.
- Mikeb85 12y ago
  Yes but AGPL is rarely used, the vast majority of FOSS uses GPL or a less restrictive license...

ntakasaki 12y ago

Continuing the story from his Wiki page: In March 2011, Aleynikov appealed the conviction, asking the Second Circuit to review the District Court's decision denying his original motion to dismiss the indictment for failure to state a claim.[9] On February 16, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit heard oral argument on his appeal and, later that same day, unanimously ordered his conviction reversed and a judgment of acquittal entered, with opinion to follow.[10] Aleynikov was released from custody the next day. On April 11, 2012, Dennis Jacobs, Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals, published a unanimous decision in a written opinion[10] stating: On appeal, Aleynikov argues, inter alia, that his conduct did not constitute an offense under either statute. He argues that: [1] the source code was not a "stolen" "good" within the meaning of the NSPA, and [2] the source code was not “related to or included in a product that is produced for or placed in interstate or foreign commerce” within the meaning of the EEA. We agree, and reverse the judgment of the district court.[9] In the course of these events, Aleynikov has spent 11 months in prison. Aleynikov has divorced, lost his savings, and his career is ruined.[11] The government did not seek reconsideration of the Second Circuit's ruling, thus ending federal action against Aleynikov.[12]

dm2 12y ago
I'm guessing that there isn't any legal recourse (monetary) for him from Goldman Sachs and the FBI ruining his life. Should there be? Goldman Sachs had every right to request that he be prosecuted, but no matter how the case turned out, his life would be ruined. I don't know of a good solution to this issue, but it just seems very wrong. I'm sure there have been countless instances of this happening though. Maybe a good solution would be to lessen the penalties for this type of crime. Maybe a legal requirement for a public apology and for the prosecutor to have to pay back legal costs? A portion of this restitution should come out of that courts budget or the department that perused the case without doing their due diligence. Did Sergey sign something saying that he could never remove code from the building or use it in another project? I'm not sure that it simply being company policy is enough, in my opinion. Has anyone here ever taken code from one employer with the intent of using it again if needed, simply to save time and not having to duplicate research? Should you be considered a criminal for that? Should you have to pay back the time the company paid you to write that code? It seems like the lessons are: 1) Don't talk to police, even if you did nothing wrong and they tell you they are on your side. Lawyer up. 2) Don't steal code, but if you do then encrypt it and put it on a portable media device. Uploading to a foreign SVN repository using the companies network wasn't very smart, don't do that. 3) Ensure that your employees know the company's policy on removing code from the premises. It seems pretty obvious but I believe that Sergey honestly didn't think he was doing anything wrong.

gflateman 12y ago

flash boys also talks about the FBI's suspicion when they heard Aleynikov was using software called 'subversion', and assuming he was thus doing something 'subversive' that cracked me up!

ithought 12y ago

His federal conviction was overturned then they later recharged him for the same incident in state court. Also Congressman Lamar Smith, who sponsored SOPA, amended the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 with the Theft of Trade Secrets Clarification Act of 2012 specifically related to this case. Sergey's Legal Defense Fund - http://www.aleynikov.org/ http://www.aleynikov.org/

yukichan 12y ago

This sucks, but seriously never talk to the police. Don't write anything down. Don't say anything. Don't sign anything. Tell them your name and otherwise just stay silent. They are never trying to help you, they're trying to close their case.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
malloreon 12y ago
Obligatory: "Don't talk to cops" - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik
- notastartup 12y ago
  Man, that was some informative video. I was shocked to learn innocent people get convicted because they talked to the cops. It's clear to me that doing such thing cannot do anything positive, it can only do negative. I'd love to attend that guy's lecture (what school is this? what is his name?), it's informative, he's funny. Makes me want to retake the LSAT.
  - yukichan 12y ago
    > I was shocked to learn innocent people get convicted because they talked to the cops. You should read up on Project Innocence casefiles: http://www.innocenceproject.org/know/ http://www.innocenceproject.org/know/ Dennis Fritz in particular, he volunteered to give hair samples which were used to create circumstantial evidence against him: http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Dennis_Fritz.php http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Dennis_Fritz.php Had he not done that, had he not gone in to talk voluntarily to the police he probably would not have lost 11 years of his life, lost seeing his daughter grow up. All for talking with the police. Do not talk to the police. The cost can be unimaginably high.
    - notastartup 12y ago

mcv 12y ago

Old story. Definitely sucks for him, but mailing yourself proprietary code of a very secretive and ruthless bank is not exactly the smartest thing to do.

fredgrott 12y ago

the problem I have with the article is that FOSS/OSS used internally and modified for that use and not distributed would mean under normal copyright and work rules that yes GS did own the changes to OSS/FOSS used internally but never distributed.

hynahmwxsbyb 12y ago

I wonder how much this cost Goldman from a talent perspective.

pritambaral 12y ago
Do you mean coders refusing to work for GS?
- emn13 12y ago
  It would certainly make me think twice. I mean why risk jail time over a bit of petty cash?
  - mbillie1 12y ago
    Depending on who you are, half a million dollars a year is not necessarily 'petty' cash. Also, people risk jail time over petty cash constantly in all walks of life.
    - FireBeyond 12y ago
      Half a million - plus bonuses, which can often be 5-10 times your salary.
    - emn13 12y ago
      It's petty in the sense that you're likely to be able to get sufficient fraction of that not to need to worry about money. At that point if you're motivated by more cash rather than not being seriously screwed, well, you don't sounds rational to me. That cash just doesn't have much value to you, and the risk does have cost to you.
  - kllrnohj 12y ago
    You risk jail time stealing code from any company. The penalty here was disproportionate to the crime, sure, but Serge clearly took code owned by GS and uploaded it, without permission, to a 3rd party. Pretty cut and dry case of corporate theft here...

infinotize 12y ago

Amazing how naive in some regards a very smart person can be. You don't send yourself source code, and you definitely don't talk to police without a lawyer, or invite them into your house.

rdtsc 12y ago

For those that don't know, Serge is a great Erlang and C++ programmer and he contributes to open source (had some pull requests to Erlang itself). Here is his Github account: https://github.com/saleyn https://github.com/saleyn You can find his posts on Erlang's mailing list once a while. Two of his interesting project I am following: https://github.com/saleyn/erlexec https://github.com/saleyn/erlexec -- a utility to control OS process from Erlang. https://github.com/saleyn/eixx/ https://github.com/saleyn/eixx/ -- Erlang to C++ interface.

davidw 12y ago
I contributed several pieces of code to erlexec without having any idea of just who he was, only later realizing it when I read the Michael Lewis piece on him. He's a very friendly guy and was quite willing to work with me on the patches I contributed to erlexec.

muyuu 12y ago

Sounds to me like it was Aleynikov who didn't understand the severity of the crime he committed. I work in a similar environment and I'm fully aware that if I do something remotely like bringing my code from work home, holy crap I'm committing a very VERY serious crime and my employer would go after me as viciously as they could. Very especially if I were to be going somewhere else where this code would set me up to make a new competing engine. Pushing stuff to SVN and mailing seem innocuous... but depending on what you are actually passing around they can be extremely serious crimes.

avoutthere 12y ago
I have also worked in similar environments. The company policies regarding treatment of source code was spelled out very clearly in the employment contract. I imagine Goldman has a very explicit contract.
daenz 12y ago
Remind me to never work for an institution like that.
- muyuu 12y ago
  Well, if they pay you high 6 figures it's not so you can take the work that you made for them (which is not yours) and use it to set up a competing product and fuck them over. It's really not that difficult to comprehend. And it's really not as bad as it sounds, if you want to work in your projects for fun, you do it in your own time. And you can still leave, it's just that if they catch you doing shit like this, it's not going to go down well.
  - loup-vaillant 12y ago
    There's more to it than the fact the code is written on behalf of your company. You have written or modified the code, so now it's part of your history. And to some extent, even a part of you. What we are isn't limited to what's inside our body and brain. The objects we interact with also count to an extent. (Being a cellist, makes me acutely aware of that.) What counts the most is any information stored in those objects, especially information you can't retrieve elsewhere —notes, journal, and other such personal data. Losing that information is like losing a memory. Being stored in a hard drive, a paper book, or a human brain doesn't make much of a difference.[1] So, when I write some code for a company, I have the right to remember it, and I will exercise that right. That's basic human dignity. If our current power structure (err, "legal system") says otherwise, then it should be reformed. On the other hand, I can restrain myself, and avoid to disclose all those memories, say, in a public SVN repository. I don't like to keep secrets, but let's face it, I already do, and it doesn't bother me too much. So, I treat corporate copyright as a form of non-disclosure agreement: I won't tell anyone. But I will remember. --- [1] looong footnote: Really it doesn't. One day, it may even make no difference at all. We don't have the technology yet, but imagine having a computer wired to our nervous system. It could act as a pair of Google glasses 5.0, or augment our intellect more directly: more working memory, more and more accurate term memories on silicon, even perfect recall. Now you can't even make the difference between neuron memories and silicon memories. They're both equally a part of you. Heck, your whole brain could be turned into silicon, it probably wouldn't make any difference. (I happen to believe in "mind uploading". I won't justify why here.) Now let an employer ask you to delete whatever copy of the code you may still hold. Now it is quite literally asking you to erase part of your memories. What exactly should you erase, anyway? Just enough to disable perfect recall? Keep whatever happens to be stored in neurons, and erase whatever is in the silicon part? What if you have stored everything about that company in silicon? (You may well have, if perfect recall makes you more productive, and requires silicon memory.) If we had the technical means right now, I believe Goldman Sachs would have us forget everything we learned while working within their walls, if not more —like in the Paycheck movie (2003). I think we can all agree it wouldn't be acceptable.

auggierose 12y ago

There is a simple solution to this. When you publish open source software, make sure that in your license it says that Goldman Sachs is not allowed to use this code for any purpose whatsoever.

pritambaral 12y ago
Why not throw in a lot of other "evil" entities too. Soon, we'll have jslint's license!
optymizer 12y ago
Rule #5 of an Open Source license: "The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons." http://opensource.org/osd-annotated http://opensource.org/osd-annotated
- GhotiFish 12y ago
  There's nothing that stops you from actually putting that clause in your license, just don't call it the GPL or MIT or whatever. "My code is freely licensed open source, Based on GPL, with the addendum that Goldman Sachs can go stick their head in a pig" As I understand it, there is nothing preventing this from happening.
  - davidw 12y ago
    Sure, you can do it. Once you do, though, your code is not open source.
    - ntakasaki 12y ago
      >Sure, you can do it. Once you do, though, your code is not open source. It is surely open source. It's just not Open Source. An important difference because of the capitalization.
      - davidw 12y ago

bayesianhorse 12y ago

Moral of the story: If you don't want to be thrown in jail for stealing something you didn't steal, don't sign a confession... In fact it sounds as if the defendant actually phrased most of the confession himself...

dannypgh 12y ago
I'll take it one step further: don't talk to the police at all. Had he said nothing and asked for a lawyer who knows what the outcome would have been? Obligatory: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc

senthilnayagam 12y ago

so effectively Goldman Sacks killed the potential competing high performance trading platform

Mikeb85 12y ago

Read the GPL carefully, very carefully... An organisation counts the same as an individual, and as long as code stays within the organization that doesn't count as 'distribution', and Goldman Sachs is under no obligation to release the code. They even retain the rights to prevent the code being released. It's easy to hate on Goldman Sachs for many things, but in this case they didn't violate the GPL, and Aleynikov did commit a crime.

nwmcsween 12y ago
Ah but you cannot change the copyright of source to something else that you want, also I'm pretty sure you cannot distribute it to subsidiaries as I'm sure was done.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- jeremyjh 12y ago
  How is that you have become sure of these things?
  - Natsu 12y ago
    It's not a good idea to remove anyone's copyright notices. See, e.g., http://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2013/08/05/infringing-copyright-think-twice-before-removing-the-copyright-notice-it-could-be-deemed-copyright-management-information-under-the-dmca/ http://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2013/08/05/infringing-copyr...
    - jeremyjh 12y ago
      I didn't say that it was. I'm questioning the GP's statement that he is sure this code was shared with subsidiaries - how is that possible?
      - nwmcsween 12y ago

dfc 12y ago

I don't understand this bit about the DNI: US master spy Clapper says spies steal open source, then immediately claims ownership and classifies it, and prosecutes if the material is disclosed, like Goldman Sachs. What did Clapper do?

leccine 12y ago

Lesson learned, don't ever work for Wall Street.

zorbo 12y ago

Okay, so. * misleading title. Goldman Sachs stole nothing. * This guy steals code from Goldman Sachs. * Covers his tracks. There is almost no reason why your password ever ends up in your bash history. If it does, you edit out only the password. Or you put a space before the command you run. At any rate, this guy should have known how to prevent his password from getting in the shell history and had no reason to delete his history. * The guy talks to the cops * Waves his rights to a lawyer * Signs a confession * Lets cops into his house without a search warrant. * Doesn't testify at this trial. This guy fully deserved what was coming to him. Goldman Sachs did nothing wrong here.

rwallace 12y ago
That's like saying if you walk down a dark alley you deserve to be mugged. It may well have been a mistake to walk down the alley, but that doesn't mean you deserved what was coming to you or that the mugger did nothing wrong.
GhotiFish 12y ago
>There is almost no reason why your password ever ends up in your bash history. If it does, you edit out only the password. Or you put a space before the command you run. http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6475524/making-sure-commands-dont-show-up-in-bash-history http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6475524/making-sure-comma... TIL! Good tip!
emn13 12y ago
You're being totally unreasonable. Being naive (waiving rights, signing a "confession") doesn't mean you deserve to be abused. That's just barbaric. As to clearing bash history, this isn't criminal, it's just a wise security measure. I've certainly cleared various log files when I knew they contained exploitable credentials. Why the heck would you waste time editing out specific statements? It's not like a bash history is valuable in any normal circumstance. By the sound of it, he certainly didn't think he was doing anything wrong, otherwise he wouldn't have been helped the FBI so thoroughly. Sounds to me like nothing he did would have been a problem if he'd have been upfront about it. Basically, Goldman encouraged an atmosphere where people went it alone, implicitly (but not formally) giving them permission to do what they want as long as it gets the job done. Now, after the job got done, they change the rules and screw their employee, who by all accounts did get the job done. Frankly, if somebody needs to go to jail, it's his boss, by the sound of it.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

FD3SA 12y ago

The programmer types were different from the trader types. The trader types were far more alive to the bigger picture, to their context. They knew their worth in the marketplace down to the last penny. They understood the connection between what they did and how much money was made , and they were good at exaggerating the importance of the link. Serge wasn’t like that. He was a little-picture person, a narrow problem solver. “I think he didn’t know his own value,” says the recruiter. This infuriates me to no end. These engineers need to be rounded up, and given a serious life lesson on the reality of markets. Knowing your product/service's worth is step 1 of any free market activity. Engineering is the only profession where the most talented engineers occupy the lowest compensation brackets with respect to their worth. All sorts of bullshit excuses are made up for this (my favorite - they're "Specialists"), but the bottom line is they are not being compensated at anywhere near what they're worth. This is why startups, and consulting firms, are so key. If the market you're trying to enter is too big for a small operation (like Wall St.), then just consult. Those 20 superstar programmers need to meet up and start a consulting firm. Then, they sell their services to these banks and charge them whatever they want (read: a lot). They then use this compensation to hire the best engineers from across the world, and keep them out of Wall St's hands. This wouldn't be too difficult, because Wall St would never match salaries because they are traders, and would die before they paid an engineer more than themselves. To all of HN: please don't underestimate your worth. It hurts everyone, including yourself.

philbarr 12y ago
but how do these engineers find out how much to charge if no one will tell them? and aren't they being underpaid because they are seen as replaceable?

eriktrautman 12y ago

I don't normally bring this up but in this case the site formatting is essentially unreadable for someone with poor eyesight who needs to expand the text and make the container narrow to avoid constant left/right scrolling.

zenbowman 12y ago

Goldman is a nest of parasites and vultures, do we really expect anything more from them?

dreamdu5t 12y ago
They are criminal co-conspirators in the capital theft of $10 billion (that we know of) from US citizens. Goldman repaid TARP loans using money given to them by the Fed by selling $11 billion of failed mortgage securities to the Fed to balance their books. We now know that more than $100 billion in MBS was purchased from Goldman by the Fed.

kayoone 12y ago

"Aleynikov was employed for two years, from May 2007 to June 2009, at Goldman at a salary of $400,000.[1] He left Goldman to join Teza Technologies, a competing trading firm which offered to triple his pay.[5]" jeez, those banks pay a pretty penny.

cmiles74 12y ago
This is probably the most important bit of information, in regards to Goldman Sachs' motivation. I think it is very likely that they simply did not want him working for competitors. They then searched high and low for ways to remove him form the market. The actions this guy was sued over are likely all things that he had done before.

yoamro 12y ago

Trying to sympathize with the guy, but signing a confession?....just doesn't make sense

PythonicAlpha 12y ago

That is the problem with invention vs. "intellectual property". Inventions belong to the inventor -- property belongs to the owner.

caycep 12y ago

probably OT...but Cryptome posting an excerpt from a Michael Lewis book? that's a bit out of character...

dfc 12y ago
Why?
- caycep 12y ago
  My understanding is the guy that runs the site bills himself as someone who posts top secret documents, usually government or corporate, from secret or anonymous sources. Kind of like a wikileaks before wikileaks came around. For him to post an excerpt from a book you can buy on Amazon is a bit, well, anticlimactic.
  - dfc 12y ago
    You make john young sound so tacky when you say "he bills himself as..." I remember downloading things from him over my modem. He has archived tons of things over the years.
    - caycep 12y ago
      I'm not denying sometimes he has interesting and even important documents on there...just sometimes it seems a little over the top or vengeful. I would say at times, I'm glad he's doing what he's doing; at other times I get a little worried. Admittedly sometimes, it's not his fault but those of his contributors - I suppose he often puts things up unedited and verbatim and there are some that are very conspiricacy-theorist

crystaln 12y ago

So, he emailed source code to himself (yes that was illegal and violated his employment contract,) deleted the bash history (there are plenty of other ways to prevent your password from showing up in history,) waived his right to a lawyer, talked endlessly with an FBI agent and was surprised (?!) that the agent was not a computer expert, then signed a confession. Sorry if I fail to have much sympathy. If you play in the big leagues, you should at least have some sense of self preservation.

Natsu 12y ago

> On the night of his arrest, Serge waived his right to call a lawyer. [...] Then he sat down and politely tried to clear up the confusion of this FBI agent who had arrested him without an arrest warrant. These are things no sane person should do, especially if they're innocent.

kylemaxwell 12y ago

I thought the policy here was to use the actual title of the article, not to edit it. Why did the moderators change it?

dang 12y ago
The guidelines say to use the original title unless it is misleading or linkbait.

doktrin 12y ago

What repeatedly stands out every time I read of this account is the relative ineptitude of the federal agents handling the investigation. There appears to be every indication that agent McSwain did everything short of taking explicit marching orders from GS. The FBI either lacked the will or ability to understand the crimes they were tasked with investigating. I find that disturbing.

james-bronze 12y ago

(I'm sorry if I do this incorrectly; first time posting plus I'm on an app) "Serge tried to explain why he always erased his bash history, but McSwain had no interest in his story. “The way he did it seemed nefarious,” the FBI agent would later testify." Whom is the FBI agent referring to, McSwain or Serge?

james-bronze 12y ago

artellectual 12y ago

Seems to me here, the biggest lesson one can learn from this story is don't work for companies like Goldman Sachs. if they don't want to get with the times and understand how the world they don't understand works then they deserve to be technically behind. So on top of not understanding your work as a developer instead of learning how things work, they choose to abuse the law. Worse part is the law is like a big spider web where it traps the small guys while the tigers and elephants walk right through, there is no justice here no matter how many sections you quote or how many laws you read. Best thing is to just be smart and not get involved. There are many opportunities out there for talented developers.

ececconi 12y ago

The original link didn't mention this was an excerpt from Flash Boys so I had no clues Michael Lewis wrote it. I've never read any of his books. Now I want to because he actually writes pretty well.

notastartup 12y ago

This is batshit insane. Wall Street is fucking insane. I hope Serge wins a huge lawsuit.