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

471–480 of 770 posts

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

#471

Post by chrismaeda »

nullc wrote: post #20
jpmattia wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Taking money from a dirty source is one thing; hiding it from the university because they've blacklisted that person in particular is about as unforgivable a crime as you'll find in academia TBH, I've never heard of a blacklisted donor at MIT, so I'm a little surprised (pleasantly, as an alum).

I'm confused by the blacklisted donor thing. The first questions I had when reading about it was "when did he end up on this list?", "why did he end up on it?, and "how big is this list?" It doesn't seem like any of the journalists even asked. That sounds like a very interesting story in and of itself.

The original New Yorker article says he was blacklisted after his 2008 felony conviction. I've been told that the CRM software used by university development offices is pretty phenomenal. It was hinted to me that it automatically annotates donor records with SEC stock transaction disclosures, and I wouldn't be surprised if it also annotates donor records with public criminal court proceedings.

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

#472

Post by anon2947 »

pryce wrote: post #340
p0llard wrote: post #108

Internal email this afternoon from President Reif: To the members of the MIT community, Last night, The New Yorker published an article that contains deeply disturbing allegations about the engagement between individuals at the Media Lab and Jeffrey Epstein. Because the accusations in the story are extremely serious, they demand an immediate, thorough and independent investigation. This morning, I asked MIT’s General…

If Xeni Jardin's claim below is true, Joi Ito needs to resign from more than just MIT: "I told the @nytimes everything. So did whistleblowers I was in touch with inside @MIT and @Edge. They printed none of the most damning truths. @joi is on the board of the NYT. THANK GOD FOR @RonanFarrow" EDIT: NYTimes is now indicating that Ito has resigned from NYT Co board, effective immediately [2]. [1] https://twitter.com/xeni…

I read a few more of Xeni's tweets, and wanted to get HN's honest opinion on them. It seems (to me) like a lot of people on Twitter (and HN?) are over-reacting.

For example, Xeni's pinned tweet references this other tweet (https://twitter.com/xeni/status/1165266579560521728), which implies that anybody who was ever at a dinner with Epstein should be considered complicit in Epstein's crimes. Take this quote, for example:

> I would like to not be sued or disappeared, but I would also like people to seriously register the fact that Amazon and Google CEOS/Founders were at the gathering alluded to in this Twitter thread. Their names are in the screen grab. Don’t sue me please. I have no money.

This seems to imply that anybody at this dinner (that Epstein) was complicit. Other attendees include Daniel C. Dennett, Steven Pinker, Marvin Minsky (yes, that Marvin Minsky!). Is it just me, or does that strike anybody as an overreaction?

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

#474

Post by paggle »

scarejunba wrote: post #335
ritchiea wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are there inevitably people who want to do the mental gymnastics of assuming innocence for a man convicted of sex trafficking? I understand assuming innocence the first time someone is accused of anything unsavory because mistakes happen. But once you are convicted, serve jail time and are suspiciously behaving in the same manner... Who are we serving by assuming innocence? And let me remind you that in society w…

I get part of the impulse. The concept that attractive Eastern European women spending their time with a billionaire means that they were trafficked somewhat strips them of agency. Like "you wouldn't do this of your own accord". Maybe they would. Of course, in this case, the fellow turned out to be a monster. But Sir Richard Branson is on the level AFAIK and he hangs out with attractive women. Presumably they enjoy t…

Richard Branson “hangs out” with 2x-year-old women, not 14-year-old girls. The difference is literally infinite in the legal realm and still enormous in the moral realm.

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

#475

Post by chaostheory »

pessimizer wrote: post #49
chaostheory wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people would if it’s normalized. Not long ago Saudi Arabian money and PRC money was just fine. It’s hard not to take it when it’s about survival.

To certain values of "survival" which apply to people in no physical danger.

HN is less of a broad community than say reddit. Not all, but many of the perspectives are going to be from a tech startup POV

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

#476

Post by paggle »

freyr wrote: post #386
crabasa wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe Ito was instrumental in helping to launch Yahoo Japan. That may be where some of his wealth came from.

From his MIT Media Lab bio: In Japan, he was a founder of Digital Garage and helped establish and later became CEO of the country’s first commercial Internet service provider. Probably netted him enough to set the rest in motion. Still, landing professorships at MIT and Harvard without a college degree is pretty wild.

The Media Lab in particular is a corporate PR/money vehicle, it’s not really an academic lab like a cancer research institute. There is some real research there but also a lot of “stick 25 Arduinos in something and make a video for a Fortune 50 company who will give you $10 million”

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

#477

Post by paggle »

burtonator wrote: post #418
cg46 wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's reasonable to agree that Epstein is a despicable person who should be maligned, ostracized, and punished for his misdeeds… while simultaneously believing that it's possible for there to exist a situation in which the good done by "maintaining ties" with this person could outweigh the bad. Of course, this depends on the nature of those ties: How much good are they doing, versus how much bad? If it's possi…

I think this is a good analysis. Makes me think that in the future these organizations are still going to accept the money but bring in a "fall guy" to accept the blame when the anonymous donor is found out. I don't think Joi would have done this personally. He's a smart guy.

A lot of smart people, when they acquire power, start to behave recklessly. It’s not necessarily irrational — powerful people are almost never held to account for their crimes, so you see people getting life in prison for robbing a liquor store but a $3 million fine for creating the opioid epidemic. So maybe it’s because they’re smart that they behave recklessly — because really, Joi Ito is going to be fine, and for every one of him there are 1000 that nothing happens to at all.

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

#478

Post by [deleted] »

ryacko wrote: post #310
tptacek wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people who accept high-profile positions don't have a moral right to retain those positions. It may not always be the case that they have a moral obligation to abandon them at the first sign of trouble; the analysis will always be fact-specific. Here, I don't think there's much doubt. Ito should have left weeks ago. He had to know this was going to happen; the last few weeks of drama have come entirely at the…

Considering that the MIT Media Lab granted a disobedience award to MeToo advocates, that makes some sense. Though it seems more pragmatic than a moral right.

[deleted]

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

#479

Post by curiousgal »

jakelazaroff wrote: post #3

Good. Here’s a particularly damning passage from Ronan Farrow’s New Yorker article [1]: > According to Swenson, Ito had informed Cohen that Epstein “never goes into any room without his two female ‘assistants,’ ” whom he wanted to bring to the meeting at the Media Lab. Swenson objected to this, too, and it was decided that the assistants would be allowed to accompany Epstein but would wait outside the meeting room. >…

>We literally had a conversation about how, on the off chance that they’re not there by choice, we could maybe help them.”

Oh I'm sure that happened! /s

It is worth noting that this person not only resigned in part because of the ties to Epstein (according to her) but also knew about said ties before she took the job.

Why is it hard to simply tell everything as it happened without trying to embellish one's picture in vain?

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

#480

Post by smsm42 »

xenadu02 wrote: post #441
freyr wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is Xeni Jardin claiming? That she brought the story to the NYT but they buried it because Ito was on the board? Why didn't she take it elsewhere? Edit: I was looking for a bit more context than a random tweet. Had to search through a bunch of tweets to find it, but apparently Xeni tweeted about Joi Ito's connection to Epstein weeks ago.

This is well-known now. Epstein cultivated powerful connections deliberately to insulate himself from scrutiny. It seems likely that he deliberately put politicians and famous people into compromising positions to ensure their cooperation (throwing lavish parties at his mansion, supplying the drugs and the underage girls). MIT banned Epstein from donating after his Sex Offender conviction. Ito did an end-run around t…

> NYT, which then buried the story. /.../ Many papers and media outlets killed Epstein stories.

So, I imagine many editors from NYT and many other papers has resigned from their jobs and their memberships in whatever professional organizations, boards, etc. they have been on, because of that? Or the press is not supposed to be held to ethical standard because... well, because they are The Press, so they are above scrutiny?

Post reply on HN