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

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

#611

Post by asveikau » Sun, Sep 08, 2019, 3:06 PM UTC

CrazyStat wrote: post #567

meerita wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But in these cases, how do you know?

In this case you know because Epstein already had a criminal conviction and MIT had already blacklisted him as a donor.

Here is one thing. If you want to get technical, without knowing everything we now know about Epstein, I am not sure a conviction is enough. MIT is not the criminal justice system. We now know that Epstein got a light sentence and the guy responsible had to quit his job in disgrace. But maybe not everybody knew this. Maybe he says, "yeah I did this thing, but I served my time blah blah, by the way please take this million dollars". And in the abstract, do you want to stigmatize every single convict or do you believe that some of them are reformed?

Obviously Epstein was not, and MIT didn't want to take the risk, correctly.

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

#612

Post by qazpot » Sun, Sep 08, 2019, 3:13 PM UTC

anon2947 wrote: post #472

pryce wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 exa…

It seems that a lot of people are of the opinion that Epstein did not get due punishment for his crimes and whatever jail time was given to him he tried everything to reduce it's severity by using his money.

This is true but instead of acting or speaking out against these loopholes in the justice system which to be fair are exploited by every rich/influential person convicted of a crime, what is happening is that people have got out the pitchforks and they want to burn everyone who ever associated with Epstein. A mere association or even a suspicion of association is being equated to a crime. This is not justice this is a mere knee-jerk reaction to the inadequacies of the justice system and will do more harm than good.

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

#613

Post by dennisgorelik » Sun, Sep 08, 2019, 3:14 PM UTC

sgt101 wrote: post #602

dennisgorelik wrote: post #535

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "... so I called mental health services" suddenly find that colleagues are talking about how socially inept they are What is the right behavior then? Should have Joi Ito recognize that "two beautiful young women" bait and cancelled all potential business with Epstein?

>What is the right behavior then? To contact mental health/wellbeing officers in your institution, and to be on record as having done it. There will be short term costs, but in the long term the costs of not doing so could be catastrophic. >Should have Joi Ito recognize that "two beautiful young women" bait and cancelled all potential business with Epstein? I don't know because I wasn't there and I don't know the cir…

> contact mental health/wellbeing officers

That may terminate the career of donations receiving officer.

In addition to losing that particular donor, other donors may start worrying if they will end up being investigated after attempting to donate.

> it shouldn't be a single person or a narrow group making these decisions

Big bureaucracy is expensive and may consume a significant part of donation money.

> a deal with Stalin

In spite of Stalin being a villain, WW2 deal that UK and the US made with Stalin against Nazy Germany -- was a positive one.

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

#614

Post by watwut » Sun, Sep 08, 2019, 3:21 PM UTC

asveikau wrote: post #609

watwut wrote: post #547

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You said this: > It all highlights the difficult job facing people tasked with taking money from donors in this way. They won't always have 20/20 hindsight. It does not highlight that and no hindsight was needed. What was needed was to not go out of your way to conceal taking money you know you should not. You converted situation into completely different situation.

In quoting me, you cut off my comments mid-paragraph. That is removal of context. I described several hypotheticals, the hindsight question being one. Yes we can point at the misdeeds of Ito and others and they are awful. But there is a nonzero amount of people here that could fall into similar traps if they were in a position to accept millions from shady characters, which most of us aren't. If Ito, as bad as his ac…

You mean, if he knew people will find out? Because that is only new information, really. Everything else was known at the time.

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

#615

Post by burtonator » Sun, Sep 08, 2019, 3:26 PM UTC

areoform wrote: post #364

This is gossip, but it’s well founded gossip as I am one or two hops away from him. Epstein was very upfront with the people he worked what that he liked “young woman” while giving them money and invited them to his parties etc. I think it was his way to enmesh them and make them unwitting partners in his systemic abuse. Most people just went along, and were eventually given a massage from a child at his behest to fu…

I thought you were going to mention that comment about Trump saying that Epstein liked "his girls on the younger side".

I think what's interesting is the ethical dilemma here.

You have 1000s of people around you. No one is saying anything. Then they offer you money. Do you take it? Everyone else is? Then the counter to this is that of the 1000s of people that come crashing down why is it just Joi Ito and a few others?

The key detail here is that Joi isn't an isolated "king" like the rest of the people here.

They will all escape justice.

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

#616

Post by asveikau » Sun, Sep 08, 2019, 3:30 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #614

asveikau wrote: post #609

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In quoting me, you cut off my comments mid-paragraph. That is removal of context. I described several hypotheticals, the hindsight question being one. Yes we can point at the misdeeds of Ito and others and they are awful. But there is a nonzero amount of people here that could fall into similar traps if they were in a position to accept millions from shady characters, which most of us aren't. If Ito, as bad as his ac…

You mean, if he knew people will find out? Because that is only new information, really. Everything else was known at the time.

It could also be that he knew some facts, but was too stupid to realize their significance until after it blows up on him.

None of it is exculpatory, mind you.

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

#617

Post by throwaway2048 » Sun, Sep 08, 2019, 3:35 PM UTC

jknoepfler wrote: post #597

anon2947 wrote: post #472

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 exa…

I think it's sad that to even engage in rational discussion about whether and to what extent people were complicit in this, you felt compelled to use an anonymous account. I don't blame you, either, mob justice is horrible.

Almost as horrible as pedophilia being protected and normalized.

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

#618

Post by dragonwriter » Sun, Sep 08, 2019, 3:37 PM UTC

prepend wrote: post #570

dragonwriter wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I’m not sure how it’s misogynist. The assumptions about the dichotomy in the potential roles of women underlying the game are literally a textbook example of misogynist gender images.

I certainly don’t see that those are the only roles for women. But in a situation there it’s a 70 year old man/woman with a 25 year old who is not their spouse, I think those are the most likely options. The game also includes being able to rule out other relationship types just based on observation. It’s also worth noting that these aren’t absolute characterizations but probabilistic. In no part of the game am I mak…

> But in a situation there it’s a 70 year old man/woman with a 25 year old who is not their spouse, I think those are the most likely options.

Sure you do, and while it is not particularly plausible that those would be the most probable—even from the categories of “family members” and “people doing their job by being there”—it is a perfect example of the Virgin-Whore mindset.

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

#619

Post by Merad » Sun, Sep 08, 2019, 3:46 PM UTC

mirimir wrote: post #309

nf8nnfufuu wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, I don't get it. Somebody having assistants who look like models and are from Eastern Europe is suspicious of trafficking women? How? Why? I have heard about Epstein, obviously with hindsight all sorts of things he did can be seen in a new light. I just don't understand what is so damning about the passage above. Would somebody who is trafficking women really take them everywhere he goes? I thought it would be…

Epstein was clearly a pedophile. Even at the time in question, it was already quite clear that he was a pedophile. So that's what's so damning. Trafficking of young women from the former Soviet Union is a complicated issue. During the collapse, and well into the 90s and mid 00s, many people were desperate. Literally starving, with ~no public services. And many criminals took advantage of that, recruiting young women…

> Epstein was clearly a pedophile. Even at the time in question, it was already quite clear that he was a pedophile.

He wasn't a pedophile, at least from what I've read. Pedophilia specifically refers to an attraction to prepubescent children - Epstein was interested in adolescent girls, which would make him a hebephile. If Epstein was going around with an entourage of 10 year old girls it would've been extremely obvious, and he would've been arrested in about 5 minutes. OTOH it can be legitimately hard to tell the difference between a 14 year old and an 18 year old. People may have heard rumors or had their own suspicions, but they probably weren't sure and that uncertainty made it easy to take the safe route and stay silent...

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

#620

Post by asveikau » Sun, Sep 08, 2019, 3:50 PM UTC

watwut wrote: post #554

meerita wrote: post #550

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But in these cases, how do you know?

In this case, I do know. It the stories were similar, then it was not not knowing. In others, if you don't know, why does one assumes it was innocent situation that highlight how unclear everything is and required hindsight? It is real question btw, not rhetorical one. The older I am, the more I see how many of much lesser ethical conflict situations have not just red flags all over them, but clear breaches going on…

> if you don't know, why does one assumes it was innocent

This is the same standard the US legal system uses, for one. "Innocent until proven guilty."

In the case of my comment I thought that it is easy to point out misdeeds but we cannot be overconfident in our own ability to prevent them under exceptional circumstances. If you were given money by a Weinstein or an Epstein, we all hope we could have the good sense to do the right thing. But how much is that actually the case? None of us are actually in that situation; few of us have been tested in this way. We could also be conned by these types. It is instructive to take a step back and understand that part. Perhaps this would help us be more vigilant should the situation actually arise.

The final point I would make. It breaks down a bit for supervillains like an Epstein. But for lesser transgressions, such as those I have seen in my own life, I can say that I used to spend a lot more time questioning people's motives, and indeed labelling people as psychopaths, sociopaths, and narcissists at a distance. Eventually I came to a realization that mentally maintaining these labels and reacting to them was a big stress on me and source of anxiety. It may sound radical, I would argue that thinking better of people by default will lead you to better mental health. But I have not figured out how this policy may apply to an Epstein, Ito, Weinstein, Hitler, etc. Thankfully I think such supervillains are a minority.