5 ms·

Minsky was a child molester. There's no way to defend that.

by bbanyc 7y ago

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
aidenn0 7y ago
I thought Minsky committed statutory rape, not child molestation, or am I behind on things that happened?
- bbanyc 7y ago
  Does it really matter? He was human garbage and it was shit like what he did that drove women out of tech for decades and I hate myself for ever having respected him. Which is the proper response to these revelations, not RMS's ridiculous hairsplitting "actually it's ephebophilia" nonsense.
  - GeorgeTirebiter 7y ago
    Excuse me? There is precisely zero evidence suggesting that MM did anything whatsoever wrong, or, in fact, had sex with an underage woman. There is an accusation by a different woman who calls the woman claiming to have had sex with MM a 'liar' in court testimony.
    - bbanyc 7y ago
      I believe Virginia Giuffre.
      - nkurz 7y ago
        I tend to trust her as well. Assuming everything she says is true to the best of her understanding, has she claimed to have had sex with Minsky? I've only seen her claims that she was asked by Epstein to do so. I find this an important distinction.
      - aidenn0 7y ago
        Your original reply to mine was flagged, so I'll reply here. I was not trying to defend Minsky with my question, I was honestly curious. If someone had instead committed burglary and you said "robbery" I would have made a similar comment; either way it's a thief, but those two crimes do describe different actions, and it's possible I misunderstood what was going on from my merely cursory reading of the news articles in question.
    - aidenn0 7y ago
      Someone accusing someone else of doing something may be paltry evidence, but it's certainly not zero evidence.
gwern 7y ago
Sure there is. How about: "the deposition never actually accuses Minsky of having sex with anyone in the first place"? Or how about, "Greg Benford says (https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/ https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/) he was personally present at the incident and witnessed there was no sex"? Wow, who knew it was so easy to defend 'a child molester' for whom there's 'no way to defend' them.
- bbanyc 7y ago
  1. The deposition that's been made public doesn't allege sex with anyone as it was in a lawsuit against Maxwell for trafficking activities. That's outside its scope. 2. I don't find Benford credible. 3. Minsky kept taking Epstein's money and holding conferences on Epstein's island for over a full decade after the events Giuffre and Benford describe took place. Is there any benign explanation for that?
  - offtheisland 7y ago
    The benign explanation is that he didn't know Epstein was a monster (few outside the DA's office did until 2018) and that he accepted funding for AI research.
    - mikeyouse 7y ago
      Literally any Google search of the man's name would show that he's a fucking monster. It was never a secret, much less after he was convicted of trafficking an underage prostitute in 2008. Nobody can plead ignorance of his crimes. Everyone who took money from him, traveled with him (and his young 'friends'), is absolutely guilty by association of his continued crimes. https://www.google.com/search?q=jeffrey+epstein&biw=1345&bih=798&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A%2Ccd_max%3A1%2F1%2F2016&tbm=nws https://www.google.com/search?q=jeffrey+epstein&biw=1345&bih...
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

Minsky was a child molester. There's no way to defend that.

by bbanyc 7y ago

Minsky was a child molester. There's no way to defend that.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

aidenn0 7y ago

I thought Minsky committed statutory rape, not child molestation, or am I behind on things that happened?

bbanyc 7y ago
Does it really matter? He was human garbage and it was shit like what he did that drove women out of tech for decades and I hate myself for ever having respected him. Which is the proper response to these revelations, not RMS's ridiculous hairsplitting "actually it's ephebophilia" nonsense.
- GeorgeTirebiter 7y ago
  Excuse me? There is precisely zero evidence suggesting that MM did anything whatsoever wrong, or, in fact, had sex with an underage woman. There is an accusation by a different woman who calls the woman claiming to have had sex with MM a 'liar' in court testimony.
  - bbanyc 7y ago
    I believe Virginia Giuffre.
    - nkurz 7y ago
      I tend to trust her as well. Assuming everything she says is true to the best of her understanding, has she claimed to have had sex with Minsky? I've only seen her claims that she was asked by Epstein to do so. I find this an important distinction.
    - aidenn0 7y ago
      Your original reply to mine was flagged, so I'll reply here. I was not trying to defend Minsky with my question, I was honestly curious. If someone had instead committed burglary and you said "robbery" I would have made a similar comment; either way it's a thief, but those two crimes do describe different actions, and it's possible I misunderstood what was going on from my merely cursory reading of the news articles in question.
  - aidenn0 7y ago
    Someone accusing someone else of doing something may be paltry evidence, but it's certainly not zero evidence.

gwern 7y ago

Sure there is. How about: "the deposition never actually accuses Minsky of having sex with anyone in the first place"? Or how about, "Greg Benford says (https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/ https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/) he was personally present at the incident and witnessed there was no sex"? Wow, who knew it was so easy to defend 'a child molester' for whom there's 'no way to defend' them.

bbanyc 7y ago
1. The deposition that's been made public doesn't allege sex with anyone as it was in a lawsuit against Maxwell for trafficking activities. That's outside its scope. 2. I don't find Benford credible. 3. Minsky kept taking Epstein's money and holding conferences on Epstein's island for over a full decade after the events Giuffre and Benford describe took place. Is there any benign explanation for that?
- offtheisland 7y ago
  The benign explanation is that he didn't know Epstein was a monster (few outside the DA's office did until 2018) and that he accepted funding for AI research.
  - mikeyouse 7y ago
    Literally any Google search of the man's name would show that he's a fucking monster. It was never a secret, much less after he was convicted of trafficking an underage prostitute in 2008. Nobody can plead ignorance of his crimes. Everyone who took money from him, traveled with him (and his young 'friends'), is absolutely guilty by association of his continued crimes. https://www.google.com/search?q=jeffrey+epstein&biw=1345&bih=798&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A%2Ccd_max%3A1%2F1%2F2016&tbm=nws https://www.google.com/search?q=jeffrey+epstein&biw=1345&bih...

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]