Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Joi Ito Resigns from M.I.T. Media Lab After Outcry over Jeffrey Epstein Ties

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 770 posts

Re: Joi Ito Resigns from M.I.T. Media Lab After Outcry over Jeffrey Epstein Ties

#91

Post by IvyMike »

matz1 wrote: post #88
IvyMike wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see evidence of that--Epstein seemed to be fairly well accepted and even chummy with the Media Lab management. Nobody consciously says "Hey this is a thing we do now--hang out with child traffickers as if it's normal" but that was the end result.

Yeah but doesn't mean they normalize the practice of child trafficking itself.

He was engaged in socially unacceptable behavior and yet was still socially accepted. I'm not sure how much more normalized it could get.

Re: Joi Ito Resigns from M.I.T. Media Lab After Outcry over Jeffrey Epstein Ties

#92

Post by adrian_mrd »

Adjacent: that’s well-written PR spin from the Gates’ camp:

> “Epstein was introduced to Bill Gates as someone who was interested in helping grow philanthropy. Although Epstein pursued Bill Gates aggressively, any account of a business partnership or personal relationship between the two is simply not true. And any claim that Epstein directed any programmatic or personal grant making for Bill Gates is completely false.”

Note the part “Although Epstein pursued Bill Gates aggressively” which implies that Gates was a victim or at least an uninterested party in this affair. If that is true, why then cough up $2 million dollars via Epstein? Why does it matter if Epstein was aggressive or not if Gates wrote the check?

Some follow-up questions that Gates should answer to clarify his role:

1. What correspondence or communications did Gates have with Epstein regarding the $2 million donation to the MIT Media Lab?

2. What correspondence or communications did Gates have with Epstein since his conviction in 2008? Best option would be to list all of the times Gates (including any representatives from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation) met with or liaised with Epstein since 2008 - including via any intermediaries or third parties and electronic communications.

3. What is the definition of business partnership in Gates’ above refuttal?

4. What is the definition of personal relationship in Gates’ above refuttal?

PR and disaster management ‘gurus’ often wordsmith their clients’ way out of these affairs.

Gates should at least clarify his role here. Otherwise, his position as a philanthropist also seems tainted.

Re: Joi Ito Resigns from M.I.T. Media Lab After Outcry over Jeffrey Epstein Ties

#93

Post by liability »

khazhou wrote: post #60
liability wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I know a few Eastern European models" Do you?

HN users are a varied bunch. There is no reason to not believe him.

That particular user is someone I distrust, based on past interactions (a habit of speaking with the "royal we" for instance.)

Re: Joi Ito Resigns from M.I.T. Media Lab After Outcry over Jeffrey Epstein Ties

#94

Post by gojomo »

nickpinkston wrote: post #29
gojomo wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, 'neoteny' doesn't "usually" mean "animals with childlike features", but rather "the retention of juvenile features into adulthood". It's conjectured that a lot of humanity's advanced intelligence & culture has been achieved with the help of our species' extended retention of juvenile learning-capacity & neural plasticity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoteny_in_humans

Changed for clarity, but my point stands. It's kind of funny in retrospect.

Funny in a 'Beavis and Butthead', "heh, heh, we can find a prurient way to interpret this" way, sure.

Re: Joi Ito Resigns from M.I.T. Media Lab After Outcry over Jeffrey Epstein Ties

#95

Post by CalChris »

FireBeyond wrote: post #46
CalChris wrote: post #37

Good. These were in no way innocent ties. He knew who Epstein was and misled people. Ito could be on the hook for civil fraud. The elements of fraud are: a purposeful misrepresentation of a fact with knowledge that it is false to a victim who justifiably relies on the misrepresentation who suffers actual loss as a result.

That's reaching, a whole lot. Ito knew who Epstein was, as did everyone else - Epstein's conviction wasn't a secret. That harms Ito through his poor decision making, but other people were just as capable of knowing who Epstein was. Who suffered an actual loss as a result of these donations? Civil fraud is grasping, some.

  (1) a purposeful misrepresentation of a fact
  (2) with knowledge that it is false
  (3) to a victim who justifiably relies on the misrepresentation 
  (4) who suffers actual loss as a result.
(1) If I lie to you (2) knowingly, and (3) you are convinced by my lies (4) to part ways with your money, then I have defrauded you. That you nobly donated to MIT doesn't matter.

Re: Joi Ito Resigns from M.I.T. Media Lab After Outcry over Jeffrey Epstein Ties

#96

Post by tptacek »

Analemma_ wrote: post #90
FireBeyond wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's reaching, a whole lot. Ito knew who Epstein was, as did everyone else - Epstein's conviction wasn't a secret. That harms Ito through his poor decision making, but other people were just as capable of knowing who Epstein was. Who suffered an actual loss as a result of these donations? Civil fraud is grasping, some.

If you read the article, you'll see that MIT specifically blacklisted Epstein from making donations as a result of his conviction, and Ito went behind their backs to keep getting money from him anyway. That's fraud, and MIT could definitely argue loss of reputation. I don't know if they'll go after Ito, but if they do, they'll have a pretty good case.

Out of curiosity, do you say this from firsthand knowledge as an expert in civil fraud law, or just in the message board sense of "it seems like they might have a pretty good case"?

Re: Joi Ito Resigns from M.I.T. Media Lab After Outcry over Jeffrey Epstein Ties

#97

Post by ajross »

turtlecloud wrote: post #57
ajross wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Relevant to that quote, it's important to point out that this kind of influence peddling fell apart, not when Epstein himself got caught, but when enough people at a high level decided they didn't want to be part of it. Ito himself clearly viewed himself as a kind of fellow traveller in Epstein's world (no idea if that involves sex trafficing! That's not my point!). Gates did too. But Signe Swenson wasn't as willing…

Herero men is irrelevant. If the situation had been reversed with gay men then it would be young boys instead.

In which case it would be really useful to have some strait dudes at the table when discussing the gay pedo's contributions, no? I think you agree with the point, just not with the particular identities in the example.

Re: Joi Ito Resigns from M.I.T. Media Lab After Outcry over Jeffrey Epstein Ties

#98

Post by bradly »

joewee wrote: post #86

Edit: Removing my comment after reading the detailed New Yorker article linked from The NY Times.

> Joi shouldn’t be hung for giving someone the benefit of doubt.

Epstein had already been convicted and banned from MIT donations.

In a position of leadership you are responsible to keep a healthy and safe workplace. That’s part of the job of running a lab. If you are unable or unwilling to do that, you should not be in a leadership role.

Re: Joi Ito Resigns from M.I.T. Media Lab After Outcry over Jeffrey Epstein Ties

#99

Post by okintheory »

cjbprime wrote: post #74
IvyMike wrote: post #13

In the other thread, people were saying "I'd take Epstein's dirty money and do good with it." But the problem is that doing so normalizes the behavior. Everybody who has doubts about working with the creep looks around the room, and when they don't see anyone else objecting, ends up thinking "I guess we're all ok with this behavior" and goes along to get along.

That doesn't sound quite right. If everyone did it, there would be no correlation between funding and reputation and power, and there just wouldn't be much reputation for someone to try to launder in this way. But everyone doesn't do it, and so we have this norm about how if someone X is an investor of Y, then some of Y's reputation transfers to X -- we assume Y did due diligence on X for us. The problem exists becau…

It's not the norm, but that is not the same as it being rare. When your money is dirty, you have to pay to launder it.

Re: Joi Ito Resigns from M.I.T. Media Lab After Outcry over Jeffrey Epstein Ties

#100

Post by [deleted] »

nickpinkston wrote: post #29
gojomo wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, 'neoteny' doesn't "usually" mean "animals with childlike features", but rather "the retention of juvenile features into adulthood". It's conjectured that a lot of humanity's advanced intelligence & culture has been achieved with the help of our species' extended retention of juvenile learning-capacity & neural plasticity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoteny_in_humans

Changed for clarity, but my point stands. It's kind of funny in retrospect.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN