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

Jeffrey Epstein and MIT: FAQs

news.mit.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 353 posts

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and MIT: FAQs

#271

Post by _r4su »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #221
totalZero wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Institute doesn't deserve your love. It has a habit of not protecting young people in its own community. Now it's under fire for turning a blind eye to the abuse of young people by its donors. Let the Institute burn. It brought this upon itself.

They killed Aaron Swartz after all.

Also don't forget that Rafael Reif was responsible for orchestrating the massive coverup of fraud at MIT Lincoln Laboratory regarding Ted Postol's allegations of fraudulent missile defense tests:

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/401412/postol-vs-the-pent....

If the Department of Defense had not punted on the investigation, then provost Rafael Reif and his supervisor president Susan Hockfield would be serving time in a federal penitentiary with former dean of MIT Sloan School of Management Gabriel Bitran

https://money.cnn.com/2014/08/12/investing/mit-professor-sca....

instead of sending thank-you notes to one of the most depraved child molesters of the 20th century.

Shame on Rafael Reif and Susan Hockfield!

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and MIT: FAQs

#272

Post by kd0amg »

ehsankia wrote: post #117
perennate wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The $60,000 gift in "2005 or 2006" is the only one the report says was deposited into his personal bank account. Because it was not sent to MIT, "this gift ... is not included in the $850,000 in" total donations the report indicates were accepted by MIT. In contrast, the $125,000 is included in the $850,000, as indicated by the breakdown in the table on page 9. Thus, though not stated explicitly, the report indicates…

What does "ask for funding to support his upcoming sabbatical" even mean? Is that for research, or is it money for him to just go on vacation for a year?

Full-year sabbatical is the norm, but the home institution does not necessarily offer salary for that full year, so it's up to the professor to find funding for the rest of it from the host or some grant. According to their web site[1], MIT pays salary for half of the sabbatical year, leaving Lloyd to raise the other half himself. 125k sounds to me like a believable half-year salary for a full professor at MIT.

1: https://vpf.mit.edu/300-sabbaticals

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and MIT: FAQs

#273

Post by malvosenior »

thatsenough wrote: post #260
malvosenior wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did any of the people you know regret going there? I know I would be able to do it. Even if they didn't participate, I would think being in an environment like that would make most people really uncomfortable.

> I know I would be able to do it. Freudian slip?

Typo

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and MIT: FAQs

#274

Post by astronautjones »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #217
3fe9a03ccd14ca5 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ugh. Everything about that island creeps me out. Hopefully someone (maxwell) is talking about what really happened there.

We have testimony about what happened there: underage girls were taken there and had their passports taken away. Listen to TrueAnon to hear all about it and enjoy banter with your fellow SF labor organizing comrades.

long live warkrime

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and MIT: FAQs

#275

Post by cjbprime »

avalys wrote: post #244

Can someone explain to me what harm was caused by MIT accepting anonymous donations from Jeffrey Epstein? As an MIT alum I don't understand what the problem is.

> “Have you managed to talk to many of my friends?”

> Epstein had been supplying me the phone numbers of important scientists and financiers and media figures. “Do you understand what an extraordinary group of people they are, what they have accomplished in their fields?"

-- http://nymag.com/news/features/41826/

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and MIT: FAQs

#276

Post by DonHopkins »

_r4su wrote: post #271
erikpukinskis wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They killed Aaron Swartz after all.

Also don't forget that Rafael Reif was responsible for orchestrating the massive coverup of fraud at MIT Lincoln Laboratory regarding Ted Postol's allegations of fraudulent missile defense tests: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/401412/postol-vs-the-pent... . If the Department of Defense had not punted on the investigation, then provost Rafael Reif and his supervisor president Susan Hockfield would be serving time…

Not just hand signed paper thank-you notes, but also Neri Oxman's artistically illuminated 3D-printed glass marble, sent as a thank-you gift for a $125,000 donation to her design lab.

https://www.artnews.com/art-news/news/neri-oxman-jeffrey-eps...

https://www.dezeen.com/2019/09/16/neri-oxman-mit-donations-j...

>The newspaper also reported that her lab produced "a grapefruit-sized, 3-D printed marble with a base that lit up", as a personal gift for Epstein that was delivered to his Manhattan apartment.

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and MIT: FAQs

#277

Post by gumby »

cjbprime wrote: post #255
gumby wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deposition page 204 line 13 (marginally ambiguous). My point about Marvin not being super famous is if I were making something up I'd make it up about famous people. https://drive.google.com/file/d/14ZOEKwoBnDKUFI1hLbFJH5nsUFx...

Could you check the page? Neither 204 of the PDF nor 204 in red at the top seems to be a deposition text page. I'm not imagining that Giuffre made anything up. I'm just trying to work out whether, after she propositioned Minsky as she was directed to by Maxwell (from the deposition, as well as Minsky's own account to other attendees), he accepted.

Page labeled in black in its footer

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and MIT: FAQs

#278

Post by gumby »

_r4su wrote: post #271
erikpukinskis wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They killed Aaron Swartz after all.

Also don't forget that Rafael Reif was responsible for orchestrating the massive coverup of fraud at MIT Lincoln Laboratory regarding Ted Postol's allegations of fraudulent missile defense tests: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/401412/postol-vs-the-pent... . If the Department of Defense had not punted on the investigation, then provost Rafael Reif and his supervisor president Susan Hockfield would be serving time…

It’s not reported but Reif’s job was also under review, though it appears to me that he survived.

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and MIT: FAQs

#279

Post by tzs »

svachalek wrote: post #206
jdminhbg wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can see Hawking surrounded by women on the island here: I assumed from the description this was going to look like Stephen Hawking at the Playboy Mansion, but instead it's him at a bbq with two middle aged men and two middle aged women, and him in a submarine with a woman whose back is to the camera so you can't tell her age apart from not being gray-haired.

It's an interesting Rorschach test. I can see all kinds of things going on here, or nothing at all. The expression on the face of the nearest woman has a serious "not amused" vibe to it no matter how I try to look at the situation though.

She's got the same kind of name tag on as the guy to her right. I'd guess that they are both attendees of the conference that was going on at the neighboring island.

That could well be her "I'm a theoretical physicist presenting at an important conference, and the only reason that news photographer is including me in the photo is because I'm sitting at the same table as Stephen Hawking" look.

Re: Jeffrey Epstein and MIT: FAQs

#280

Post by michaelmrose »

samstave wrote: post #196
mlyle wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Normally one would give the benefit of the doubt, but given the abhorrent acts people were perpetrating or turning a blind eye to in this case, I'm inclined not to. I think this is a dangerous way to look at things... Just because there's a lot of shady people doing awful things, doesn't mean we should tar everyone who associated with the person. Whatever other things happened with other people doesn't really matte…

> I think this is a dangerous way to look at things No it is not. Its sound. > Whatever other things happened with other people doesn't really matter. YES. They Do! The guy was trafficking kids for sex and blackmail, and was frequently ferrying high profile people to his island which to every account was used for sex acts with minors. The witnesses are many. His ties to Mossad, high powered elites in royal and politi…

It just came out where precisely that comeys daughter erased the tapes?
Post reply on HN