
On me, and the Media Lab - msghacq
http://www.ethanzuckerman.com/blog/2019/08/20/on-me-and-the-media-lab/
======
coldtea
> _I also wrote notes of apology to the recipients of the Media Lab
> Disobedience Prize, three women who were recognized for their work on the
> #MeToo in STEM movement. It struck me as a terrible irony that their work on
> combatting sexual harassment and assault in science and tech might be
> damaged by their association with the Media Lab._

Perhaps the anti-harassment movement should expand to also promote the fact
that people's work (or person) should not be damaged merely by association?

~~~
sitkack
Media Lab Disobedience Prize looks like the Aaron Swartz Prize.

------
strangeloops85
The related Epstein-academia connection which deserves scrutiny is with Martin
Nowak at Harvard. Certainly far more money involved in terms of donations. And
many articles referenced him visiting with Epstein extensively, including his
island.

~~~
strangeloops85
As a follow-up to the Harvard connections that remain under-scrutinized,
here’s an alarming tweet from a Caltech professor:

‘Around 2007 I attended a dinner at @Harvard during which someone told me
about a professor who was flying to New York, and to some island, to visit a
millionaire. With that millionaire, I was told, he was raping girls.
"Everybody knows" they said..‘
[https://twitter.com/lpachter/status/1163608101443928064?s=21](https://twitter.com/lpachter/status/1163608101443928064?s=21)

~~~
goatinaboat
_he was raping girls. "Everybody knows" they said_

Again with the parallels to Harvey Weinstein. All the happy, smiling people
photographed with him also scrambled to distance themselves once the
allegations reached a critical mass, but they all knew all along what he was.
And as long as it suited their interests they were perfectly willing to look
the other way.

~~~
skrebbel
Really? How would they know?

I'm asking sincerely, I've not deeply read into this (or the Epstein story). I
just always suspected that rich and influential people would generally be able
to keep secrets under wraps.

I guess I just think it's kind of odd to assume that everyone who ever posed
on a photo with Weinstein knew he was a rapist. That's quite a far stretch of
"guilty by association"

~~~
AareyBaba
You can read deeply here [https://www.miamiherald.com/topics/jeffrey-
epstein](https://www.miamiherald.com/topics/jeffrey-epstein)

------
msghacq
Nathan Matias is also leaving for the same reason:
[https://medium.com/@natematias/leaving-the-mit-media-lab-
ea3...](https://medium.com/@natematias/leaving-the-mit-media-lab-ea3066dfeb21)

~~~
xhkkffbf
BTW, he already has a job at Cornell. He was already going to leave. I'm not
sure he's sacrificing much of anything.

------
jackbravo
I like very much his addendum:

> So thank you for all the kind words about bravery. Truth is I’m privileged
> enough to afford to be brave. For those of you who love the Media Lab and
> want to see it sail through these rough waters, please take time to reach
> out to people who may not be able to be as visible in their next steps. Make
> sure they’re doing okay. Support them whether their decision is to leave or
> to stay. So many of my colleagues at the Media Lab right now are hurting,
> and they need your support and love too. Hope we can redirect some of that
> love folks are sharing with me to them too.

~~~
enjeyw
Yeah, I'd previously only heard about Zuckerman in passing, but that post
really gave me the impression of highly empathetic and considerate person.

------
tptacek
I'd love a brief explainer on why exactly Joi Ito and the Media Lab are
supposed to be such a big deal.

~~~
nostrademons
Dunno about Joi Ito - his biggest claim to fame prior to directing the Media
Lab seems to be as a venture capitalist who invested in Flickr, Kickstarter,
Twitter, Six Apart, etc.

The Media Lab has a long history of innovations that you've probably heard of:
E-ink, Formlabs (3D printers), RockBand/GuitarHero, the touchstick on IBM
Thinkpads, OLPC, Lego Mindstorms, and Scratch were all developed there.

~~~
sam_lowry_
It's a short list, and some "inventions" are dubious at best. OLPC for
instance.

~~~
nostrademons
Those were the ones _I 've_ heard of - the actual list is quite a bit longer,
but includes a lot of B2B technologies in industries I don't care about.

That's pretty good for an organization with a budget of $75M and a permanent
staff of 80. I'd be hard-pressed to think of an organization of similar size
that's had greater impact - maybe YCombinator or Stanford's CS department.
Bell Labs was orders of magnitude bigger - in their 1970s heyday they had
24,000 employees and a budget of around $6B in today's money.

~~~
pvg
Bell Labs can just show up in this competition, say 'the transistor', drop the
mic and walk out. Media Lab has always been, by design, about outreach and
demos and fundraising as much as (if not more than?) about research. Comparing
it to real research institutions on the basis of research is never going to
come out flattering.

------
skellera
Was the connection just that they took money from Epstein? Did they already
know about the things he was doing when they took the money?

~~~
hwillis
Literally the first sentence was that Marvin Minsky was implicated in his
crimes[1].

> Did they already know about the things he was doing when they took the
> money?

Clearly yes: "Joi asked me in 2014 if I wanted to meet Epstein, and I refused
and urged him not to meet with him." The first cases against Epstein were in
2008 and Epstein's reputation has been well known since then.

[1]: [https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-
jef...](https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/9/20798900/marvin-minsky-jeffrey-
epstein-sex-trafficking-island-court-records-unsealed)

~~~
azinman2
Let’s not forget that it’s an allegation against Marvin Minsky, not a proved
event. He’s not even alive to confirm or deny the charge. As someone who was
around Minsky, I have a very very hard time believing this for a number of
reasons.

Our culture has gotten to the point where an accusation is enough in the court
of opinion. It’s good that these issues have brought awareness to places where
victims have been otherwise minimized in the past, or have been proof less of
the action despite it happening. And that’s a tough thing. But occasionally
these accusations are proved to be false. I think we’re getting carried away
here, at least as far as Minsky goes.

~~~
coldtea
> _Our culture has gotten to the point where an accusation is enough in the
> court of opinion_

That's true. On the other hand, out culture was for far more decades (nay,
millennia) to the point that people could not care less about such
accusations, and the power figures could do whatever they liked...

Also, it wasn't just an accusation in the "court of opinion", but a deposition
to an actual court.

"In a deposition, Giuffre, née Roberts, claimed she was trafficked to MIT
professor Marvin Minsky, who died in 2016 at age 88, as well as former Maine
Sen. George Mitchell, ex-New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson and money manager
Glenn Dubin, whose wife, Eva, is an ex-girlfriend of Epstein’s."

Still, it's not proven and I'm against the "court of public opinion", at least
in more shallow cases (e.g. Woody Allen). But here it's at Weinstein and worse
level.

I can see some fake-victim badmouthing a powerful figure to bring them down.
Or to blackmail them. Or for revenge (e.g. from a bad relationship, etc). So
I'd understand it if e.g. it was fake accusation just against one person.

But it seems too much for a fake-victim to name names of several people, and
powerful people at that, on top.

~~~
smacktoward
Not to mention that, if you believe Giuffre was grandstanding, why on earth
would she name an academic whose name nobody outside of the CS world would
recognize? If she was just pulling names out of thin air, how many famous
names would the average person go through before they got to Marvin Minsky?

It's the very out-of-left-field-ness of the allegation that makes it seem
credible.

~~~
gwern
Er, they aren't out of left field, any more than naming Steven Pinker or
Dershowitz is 'out of left field'. Gosh, how many names would you have to go
down to think about those guys? Well - not that many when you consider that
she's just naming people who were already known to have gone to Epstein
dinners etc. That's not _that_ large a set of people, and why would you name
random people who had never had any kind of association with Epstein when you
can pick ones you knew were at least around at some point and thus plausible?

~~~
mlevental
dershowitz is a public figure. he's constantly on national talking heads news
type shows and has had very public spats (thereby making him more visible)
with other talking heads.

Pinker, while not as famous as dershowitz, is also a public figure - he's
published several pop sci books and also makes the rounds on various morning
shows (to promote his books).

Minsky was purely an academic - as far as I know he never published pop books
and only spoke at academic conferences. he's much much further down the list.

Furthermore this was admitted into the record as sworn testimony, lying being
punishable by perjury laws. And note she gave the deposition before epstein
committed suicide (so conceivably she could've proven to be lying). Who are
you to cast doubt on criminal procedures simply because it suits some
narrative of yours about perceived witch-hunts?

~~~
gwern
You are ignoring my point. No one is doubting that Minsky associated with
Epstein. _That is all that is necessary for her to know his name and be able
to accuse him, and her knowing his name is not dramatic evidence of truth._
What would be valid evidence of truth would be something like a third party
(like, say, Greg Benford) confirming it.

> Minsky was purely an academic - as far as I know he never published pop
> books and only spoke at academic conferences. he's much much further down
> the list.

This is not even accurate. Minsky was the oracle of AI, the head of the MIT AI
Lab. He influenced AI from the 1950s to the 1990s. Any pop article about AI
might quote or interview Minsky. And what is 'Society of Mind' but a
popularization, widely read?

> Furthermore this was admitted into the record as sworn testimony, lying
> being punishable by perjury laws.

Oh, well, that settles it. I'm glad we had this discussion about critical
thinking.

Incidentally, for all your huffing about witch hunts and perjury law, I would
point out that she could easily be telling the truth. The deposition only
claims that she was _told_ to have sex with Minsky, and not, as far as any
media coverage I've seen goes, that she actually _did_ , and Greg Benford
states he was there and that Minsky turned her down:
[https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/](https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/)

~~~
mlevental
>You are ignoring my point. No one is doubting that Minsky associated with
Epstein.

i am not. your point is that since he was a famous academic his name was as
easily recognizable as dershowitz and pinker, who are generally famous.

>What would be valid evidence of truth would be something like a third party
(like, say, Greg Benford) confirming it.

sorry that's not what we as a society has deemed sufficient proof. though you
are welcome relitigate literally all of common law dating back to the magna
carta though if you believe it should be otherwise.

>Minsky was the oracle of AI, the head of the MIT AI Lab. He influenced AI
from the 1950s to the 1990s.

means literally nothing to general public and therefore doesn't substantiate
your claim.

>And what is 'Society of Mind' but a popularization, widely read?

i concede this one. i was not aware of this book.

>Oh, well, that settles it. I'm glad we had this discussion about critical
thinking.

so do you then doubt all depositions or just the ones that implicate oracles
of AI?

>The deposition only claims that she was told to have sex with Minsky, and
not, as far as any media coverage I've seen goes, that she actually did, and
Greg Benford states he was there and that Minsky turned her down:
[https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/](https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/)

my point was only about the validity of her testimony. yours (initially) was
the defense of minksy.

------
asdf333
I will probably be tarred and feathered for this comment as well but:

I think this whole thing has turned into a witch hunt / mob assault on anyone
who has had any ties to Epstein. The attitude of many of the comments seem to
essentially suggest that if one has been at the same party as epstein sometime
in the past, such person must be a child molester.

Now people are falling over themselves trying to one up each other on who can
display the most moral outrage.

It is an example of how public discourse has degenerated to the point where we
are attacking people first and refusing to ask even some basic questions
before branding someone as guilty by association.

( __edited out "come on it is ridiculous" as it seemed unnecessarily
inflammatory)

~~~
wastedhours
Odd take - almost all of the stories are about people who ended up engaging
extensively with him after he'd already been convicted of being a sex
offender.

Sure, you can associate with whomever you want to, but the media highlighting
the fact that notable people continued to not only be friendly with, but often
appear to be in the pocket of financially, someone rather heinous is not
really a "witch hunt".

(Especially considering many of the allegations are of using this financial
power as a pawn in a larger blackmail operation means those financial ties do
have to be investigated)

~~~
toomuchtodo
I have befriended and helped (provided housing and other support) convicted
felons who have done their time. Where do you draw the line?

Edit: I agree with those who have replied, and appreciate that my question was
answered with genuine effort.

~~~
SolaceQuantum
Did Epstein finish doing his time before these people were willing to recieve
investment money from him?

~~~
toomuchtodo
No, but that’s sort of my point. Ambiguity and fear shouldn’t be used to
dissuade helping those who did do their time, so it’s important to point out
exceptions and why they are exceptions (Epstein was unable to be reformed
IMHO, which is both tragic and a cautionary tale).

It’s hard to discern the reformed from the monsters sometimes, but the
reformed still deserve another chance.

~~~
SolaceQuantum
Your point was that you assisted people _after they did their time_.

Epstein did not do his time. He did not go through any reformation process.
People were willing to take his money and his professional connections even
knowing his recent conviction for which his time was upcoming.

This isn't a case where someone is reformed and people aren't forgiving them.
Epstein was not reformed, did not serve his time, and people were still
actively engaging with him. Those people were not engaging with a reformed
man. They were engaging with a predator.

I entirely agree with you that reformed felons deserve a chance after they
serve their time. Epstein was not reformed and he did not serve time,
therefore what chance did he deserve on account of these people?

~~~
toomuchtodo
Aren’t we debating how to determine if someone is reformed? I thought we were,
and if not by judicial process (prison sentencing), what? I absolutely agree
Epstein wasn’t reformed, and that the challenge is to suss out who is and
isn’t a danger to society any longer (“reformed”). I don’t know how to do that
besides gut feeling and guardrails to minimize blast radius when poor
judgement has occurred.

------
nwah1
It is known that Epstein's main way of operating was blackmail, and it is
baffling to think of what kind of motivation he had to blackmail academics.
Media reports that at least some of the academics were involved in the sex
crimes.

I know he had an interest in transhumanism, but I still fail to understand the
logic.

~~~
nappy-doo
I don't like promoting conspiracy theories.

Now that that's out of the way, here's a doozy:

[https://jamesaltucher.com/blog/jeffrey-epstein-
money/](https://jamesaltucher.com/blog/jeffrey-epstein-money/)

~~~
smacktoward
There's an even more Occam's-Razor-compatible explanation for where his money
came from than the "Club Epstein" one: it wasn't his money at all. It was
money he stole from Leslie Wexner, who had mysteriously entrusted him with
vast sums, and even gave him his power of attorney (!). See
[https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/7/10/20689134/jeffrey-
eps...](https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/7/10/20689134/jeffrey-epstein-les-
wexner-l-brands-victoria-secret-limited) for more details on the Epstein-
Wexner relationship.

 _Why_ exactly Wexner chose to put Epstein in a position to steal so much from
him remains a mystery, but if you buy that Epstein was a blackmailer a
reasonable assumption would be that he had something on Wexner and used it as
leverage.

~~~
nwah1
Or both are true simultaneously.

~~~
smacktoward
Yes, it's possible that he blackmailed Wexner, and then used Wexner's money to
bootstrap the "Club Epstein" scenario.

But if you're trying to lure people in so you can blackmail them, why would
you bother charging them $20 million at the door? They can afford it, sure,
but wouldn't that risk some of them saying no and thus denying you the
opportunity to blackmail them?

~~~
nwah1
I suspect that people would get suspicious if someone is offering them free
sex parties. If there's a fee then it would probably be less suspicious.

------
facethrowaway
Once you read the Epstein interview with the New York Times writer, you start
to understand that there’s probably more of these “unconventional thinkers” in
tech connected to Epstein and his behavior than we are ever going to find out.
The whole “being ostracized for an attraction to teenage girls is a very new
idea” thing sounds exactly like a lot of what someone would hear at the late
end of a Silicon Valley dinner party.

Anyone who is apologizing for this behavior or who thinks this is a “witch
hunt” may want to consider using a throwaway name, because these comments
aren’t going to age well. And yes, we will remember.

------
HenryDavis65
requires login

