Hacker News Reader

Comment by gregoryrueda | Hacker News Reader

Is this so they can build their own Blockchain?

The other members was not happy when they found out that GS applied for patents that could affect R3. My guess is that GS thinks they will make more money on their own when they built up a nice patent portfolio in this space.

Reminds me of this quote:

"Gentlemen! I too have been a close observer of the doings of the Bank of the United States. I have had men watching you for a long time, and am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves. I have determined to rout you out, and by the Eternal, (bringing his fist down on the table) I will rout you out!"

-https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Andrew_Jackson

this bank should have been smashed into a thousand pieces and and scattered to the wind as a condition of the bailout.

A colorful Andrew Jackson quote. The Bank War was a little more complex and Jackson himself was no innocent.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_War

He also said:

All the rights secured to the citizens under the Constitution are worth nothing, and a mere bubble, except guaranteed to them by an independent and virtuous Judiciary.

John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!

I am a firm believer that we should not judge people from the past using the moral standard of today. Remember that even Obama opposed gay marriage up until a couple years ago.

And yet you quoted someone from the past as an exemplar regarding a moral issue of today. You kinda opened that door.

It's a relevant quote that matches the sentiment many of us have toward banks which are "too big to fail".

A rousing quote from a genocidal madman who didn't understand finance and crippled the US economy for nearly a hundred years.

Genocidal I can grant, but we are talking about bank policy here. It seems that all evidence says that the 100 years after Jackson were objectively some of the most economically dynamic for the United States, especially in comparison to Europe or any other place in the world during that period. How was the economy crippled?

It was my understanding that (and especially absent a central bank) the US economy became prone to frequent and periodic economic panics, uncontrolled periods of inflation and deflation, and general financial instability.

As opposed to now, when we have frequent bubbles and bursts and more inflation?

It's hard to say what's better.

Both bubbles and bursts were more frequent and of higher amplitude in the 19th century:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_Historical_Inflat...

You are referring to the time period immediately preceding but not including the 1940s and 50s?

I can't speak for the 100 years, but I always thought his determination to pay off the national debt was a big contributor to economic problems[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Jackson#Panic_of_1837

Maybe you'll like this one better:

It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes. Distinctions in society will always exist under every just government. Equality of talents, of education, or of wealth can not be produced by human institutions. In the full enjoyment of the gifts of Heaven and the fruits of superior industry, economy, and virtue, every man is equally entitled to protection by law; but when the laws undertake to add to these natural and just advantages artificial distinctions, to grant titles, gratuities, and exclusive privileges, to make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society — the farmers, mechanics, and laborers — who have neither the time nor the means of securing like favors to themselves, have a right to complain of the injustice of their government. There are no necessary evils in government. Its evils exist only in its abuses. If it would confine itself to equal protection, and, as Heaven does its rains, shower its favors alike on the high and the low, the rich and the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing. pretty damn relevant today. (rent seeking, crony capitalism, lobbyists writing the bills)

GS didn't receive any direct bailout funds. Only what it received via AIG which wasn't all that much.

This is incorrect. Goldman Sachs received $10B which they repaid.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/economy/2009-04-14-tarp...

That's true. All the banks were forced to take bailout money because the concern was if a sound bank was allowed to refuse, shaky banks would either be punished in the market for accepting or worse would be pressured into refusing when they actually needed the money.

GS paid the money back literally as soon as they were allowed to.

Not a GS fan at all. Arguably Lehman was gutted at their bidding. They only became a bank that September. Etc.

I don't think it's that simple/straight forward. Another member has also dropped out: http://www.coindesk.com/santander-drops-out-r3-blockchain-co...

That surprises me -- they make a lot of money from swaps and other non-exchange settled contracts' volume, especially if such contracts can be traded easily across banks. MarkItPartners is an excellent example of how all the banks made a lot of money through a consortium pushing a unified standard. Why try to make money off a patent when they can grow volume on their core product?

because they would love to unilaterally control critical pieces of next gen digital currencies enabling them to bludgeon competing standards / companies out of the market with IP licensing fees.

> GS thinks they will make more money on their own when they built up a nice patent portfolio in this space.

So instead of contributing back to the community on a openly-developed technology (not talking about R3, but Satoshi's blockchain concept), they could decide that the best course of action is to patent encumber the shit out of it!

What patents? I just tried to find in the USPTO and nothing came up. Do you have a link?

Is this a claim in the form of a question?

They could do both, after all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com