4 ms·

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 m

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

azinman2 7y ago
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 7y ago
  >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 7y ago
    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 7y ago
      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?
      - msghacq 7y ago
        > 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? Are you, gwern, questioning the validity of the accusations? It seems as if many powerful and important people are circling the wagons to protect their friends and associates.
        gwern 7y ago
        My point is that there is nothing astounding and indicative of extra credibility due to the 'obscurity' of Marvin Minsky coming 'out of left field', when any accuser, either lying or honest, would of course be naming known associates of Epstein. It is an invalid argument.
- hwillis 7y ago
  Trump was talking about him "liking girls on the younger side" in 2002. Epstein pleaded guilty to soliciting an underaged prostitute in 2008, sane people had been distancing themselves. Anybody who had anything to do with Epstein after ~2009-2010 did so in the face of active public castigation. The 2005 investigation stemmed from a mother bringing her daughter to the police station after she had been at Epstein's mansion. And the evidence included over 50 underaged girls, before the prosecution dropped it to two counts and then one count of assault... and NOT for lack of evidence. The girls' high school report cards were found in his house. The man was a pedophile and a predator. The fact that anyone was willing to associate with him in any capacity after 2008 is just insane. In 2009 the flight logs were leaked and the smart people in that list cut contact. Anyone who continued to associate with Epstein after that did with the full knowledge of what he was, because people would actively reach out to them to ask about it.
  - azinman2 7y ago
    Yes it seems bad that Joi had any involvement with him after these charges. Raising money is a powerful motivator, and that money is rarely clean. This is just more on the surface. The Media Lab was funded by Schlumberger when I was there, which is a big oil/gas company. Helping accelerate climate change is a horror to the world that might lead to the mass extinction of our species. Yet no one seems to resign over that. But in terms of Marvin, we don’t know what his involvement was. Only an allegation in court. And from what I know about Marvin, I wouldn’t assume he would do research on someone like that before deciding to attend a dinner. More importantly, it’s completely inconceivable in my mind that he actually was involved any extra martial affairs, let alone a sex trafficked prostitute. He once told me “what’s the point of a body? We should all be heads on top of a cart.” He was already super old at that point. So to combine his higher plane of existence with the lack of hormones from an old age, it just seems extremely improbable to me. I feel bad for all the woman involved with Epstein. He’s clearly done some really terrible things. But let’s not take down the character of others (who aren’t even alive to defend themselves) solely based on an accusation.

azinman2 7y ago

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 7y ago
>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 7y ago
  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 7y ago
    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?
    - msghacq 7y ago
      > 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? Are you, gwern, questioning the validity of the accusations? It seems as if many powerful and important people are circling the wagons to protect their friends and associates.
      - gwern 7y ago
        My point is that there is nothing astounding and indicative of extra credibility due to the 'obscurity' of Marvin Minsky coming 'out of left field', when any accuser, either lying or honest, would of course be naming known associates of Epstein. It is an invalid argument.
hwillis 7y ago
Trump was talking about him "liking girls on the younger side" in 2002. Epstein pleaded guilty to soliciting an underaged prostitute in 2008, sane people had been distancing themselves. Anybody who had anything to do with Epstein after ~2009-2010 did so in the face of active public castigation. The 2005 investigation stemmed from a mother bringing her daughter to the police station after she had been at Epstein's mansion. And the evidence included over 50 underaged girls, before the prosecution dropped it to two counts and then one count of assault... and NOT for lack of evidence. The girls' high school report cards were found in his house. The man was a pedophile and a predator. The fact that anyone was willing to associate with him in any capacity after 2008 is just insane. In 2009 the flight logs were leaked and the smart people in that list cut contact. Anyone who continued to associate with Epstein after that did with the full knowledge of what he was, because people would actively reach out to them to ask about it.
- azinman2 7y ago
  Yes it seems bad that Joi had any involvement with him after these charges. Raising money is a powerful motivator, and that money is rarely clean. This is just more on the surface. The Media Lab was funded by Schlumberger when I was there, which is a big oil/gas company. Helping accelerate climate change is a horror to the world that might lead to the mass extinction of our species. Yet no one seems to resign over that. But in terms of Marvin, we don’t know what his involvement was. Only an allegation in court. And from what I know about Marvin, I wouldn’t assume he would do research on someone like that before deciding to attend a dinner. More importantly, it’s completely inconceivable in my mind that he actually was involved any extra martial affairs, let alone a sex trafficked prostitute. He once told me “what’s the point of a body? We should all be heads on top of a cart.” He was already super old at that point. So to combine his higher plane of existence with the lack of hormones from an old age, it just seems extremely improbable to me. I feel bad for all the woman involved with Epstein. He’s clearly done some really terrible things. But let’s not take down the character of others (who aren’t even alive to defend themselves) solely based on an accusation.