To clarify, this patent went through one day
before the Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank
decision, which boiled down to "you can't patent something just by saying 'do it with a computer'".
In a concise 17-page opinion, the Supreme Court recognized that Alice claimed the abstract concept of “intermediated settlement,” something the Supreme Court recognized was “a fundamental economic practice long prevalent in our system of commerce.” Having done this, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that merely adding “a generic computer to perform generic computer functions” does not make an otherwise abstract idea patentable. This statement (and the opinion itself) makes clear that an abstract idea along with a computer doing what a computer normally does is not something our patent system was designed to protect.
So now we see it's doubly stupid because the patent still stands even though it's passing premise has been invalidated.