6 ms·

Both MIT and Harvard have admitted to helping Jeffrey Epstein avoid prosecution on federal racketeering charges for the sex-trafficking of minors after they wer

Both MIT and Harvard have admitted to helping Jeffrey Epstein avoid prosecution on federal racketeering charges for the sex-trafficking of minors after they were exposed by whistle-blowers at both of these institutions. Not sure why it would be appropriate then to exclude Stallman from serving on the Board of the FSF while allowing Rafael Reif, for example, to remain president of MIT after sending a personally signed "thank-you note" to one of the most notorious alleged sex-traffickers and convicted child-rapists in US history: https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2020/01/12/after-epstein-affair-president-rafael-reif-should-not-running-mit/C3weZQW2qtw6qbEgFkNFJO/story.html https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2020/01/12/after-epstei... Nor would it be any more appropriate to allow Mr. Seth Lloyd back onto the MIT campus with just a slap on the wrist: https://thetech.com/2021/02/25/mit-administration-epstein-op-ed https://thetech.com/2021/02/25/mit-administration-epstein-op... Or Mr. Martin "Punishment Serves No Noble Purpose" Nowak for that matter either: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/03/26/metro/harvard-sanctions-professor-with-close-jeffrey-epstein-ties-closes-program-he-ran/ https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/03/26/metro/harvard-sanctio... This hacker news thread on Nowak is worth reading again: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25442060 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25442060 So why has nobody drafted petitions to cancel Rafael Reif, Benedict "Dick" Gross, Alan "Dershbag" Dershowitz, Martin Nowak, Steven Pinker, Seth Lloyd, Neri Oxman, Frank Wilczek, and all of the other pedophilia-supporting two-faced phonies that attended Edge Foundation dinners hosted by the convicted child rapist and/or visited him on "Pedophile Isle," where FBI reportedly found instruction manuals that Mr. Epstein had ordered on Amazon that describe how to create a so-called "sex slave," in addition to video tapes containing child pornography that he allegedly recorded using secret cameras that were installed throughout his various residences? Ito resigned. Kosslyn has repeatdly resigned as he tried to run with his tail between his legs from one university to the next as soon as he started to feel the heat (thanks to some anonymous emails). It's time to cancel the rest of them too ... and that now includes Claudine Gay at Harvard and Martin Schmidt at MIT who signed off on allowing Nowak and Lloyd to return to their respective campuses !!!

Zuider 5y ago
Where is the presumption of innocence, where accusations of guilt must pass a burden of proof? Stallman is the least 'guilty' of the people you mention, since his 'crimes' consist of the pedantic quibbling over definitions that are typical of an individual suffering from Asperger's syndrome. They are, of course, 'wooden-eared' and easily misrepresented by persons of bad faith such as the petitioners linked above. There is zero positive evidence that he advocates, or ever participated in pedophilia. I put 'guilty' in scare-quotes because, unless there is solid evidence to the contrary, there is only guilt by association involved. Epstein was a big donor, especially to research programs in physics, and that is the basis of their association with him.
- Udik 5y ago
  I agree with the rest of your comment, but > pedantic quibbling over definitions that are typical of an individual suffering from Asperger's syndrome I don't get why expressing (however unpopular) opinions based on rational arguments should be dismissed as "pedantic quibbling" caused by some underlying mental issue. Just consider how closed-minded, not to mention offensive, is to characterise opinions you disagree with as the product of a mental syndrome. Besides, Stallman's opinions are not about subtle points without practical consequences. The laws and language in the US (which are, by the way, NOT always shared by the rest of the advanced world) have very practical- sometimes terrible- consequences on people's lives. So I don't think it's fair to call it "pedantic quibbling".
  - Zuider 5y ago
    Stallman was responding only to the accusations against his colleague and friend, the late Prof. Marvin Minsky, not making policy prescriptions. It is clear that he did not want to believe that Prof. Minsky was guilty, and he engaged in precisely that direct and unfiltered thinking aloud that can get people who are on the autistic spectrum into trouble.
    - Udik 5y ago
      If that were the case, the "pedantic quibbling" would be exactly of the same sort that takes place every day in courts of justice- and it's at the base of our judicial system, as the right to defense from accusations. Stallman is using it to defend the reputation of a deceased friend, I think it has value. Anyway, there are many more statements by Stallman that caused outrage, and they are about morals and public policy. And he has the full right to hold and express opinions that go against that of the majority in his time and his country, without them being dismissed as the ramblings of someone suffering from a mental disorder.
      - Zuider 5y ago
        Noting that somebody has Asperger's syndrome is not an invitation to dismiss their words. Instead it provides context and insight into why they speak as they do, which furthers correct understanding of what they have said, and their motives for speaking.

Zuider 5y ago

Where is the presumption of innocence, where accusations of guilt must pass a burden of proof? Stallman is the least 'guilty' of the people you mention, since his 'crimes' consist of the pedantic quibbling over definitions that are typical of an individual suffering from Asperger's syndrome. They are, of course, 'wooden-eared' and easily misrepresented by persons of bad faith such as the petitioners linked above. There is zero positive evidence that he advocates, or ever participated in pedophilia. I put 'guilty' in scare-quotes because, unless there is solid evidence to the contrary, there is only guilt by association involved. Epstein was a big donor, especially to research programs in physics, and that is the basis of their association with him.

Udik 5y ago
I agree with the rest of your comment, but > pedantic quibbling over definitions that are typical of an individual suffering from Asperger's syndrome I don't get why expressing (however unpopular) opinions based on rational arguments should be dismissed as "pedantic quibbling" caused by some underlying mental issue. Just consider how closed-minded, not to mention offensive, is to characterise opinions you disagree with as the product of a mental syndrome. Besides, Stallman's opinions are not about subtle points without practical consequences. The laws and language in the US (which are, by the way, NOT always shared by the rest of the advanced world) have very practical- sometimes terrible- consequences on people's lives. So I don't think it's fair to call it "pedantic quibbling".
- Zuider 5y ago
  Stallman was responding only to the accusations against his colleague and friend, the late Prof. Marvin Minsky, not making policy prescriptions. It is clear that he did not want to believe that Prof. Minsky was guilty, and he engaged in precisely that direct and unfiltered thinking aloud that can get people who are on the autistic spectrum into trouble.
  - Udik 5y ago
    If that were the case, the "pedantic quibbling" would be exactly of the same sort that takes place every day in courts of justice- and it's at the base of our judicial system, as the right to defense from accusations. Stallman is using it to defend the reputation of a deceased friend, I think it has value. Anyway, there are many more statements by Stallman that caused outrage, and they are about morals and public policy. And he has the full right to hold and express opinions that go against that of the majority in his time and his country, without them being dismissed as the ramblings of someone suffering from a mental disorder.
    - Zuider 5y ago
      Noting that somebody has Asperger's syndrome is not an invitation to dismiss their words. Instead it provides context and insight into why they speak as they do, which furthers correct understanding of what they have said, and their motives for speaking.