Twitter | Search | |
Gernot Wagner Sep 15
There are no easy answers here, just slightly less bad ones. One bit is clear: reputation laundering is a real problem
Reply Retweet Like
Stewart Brand
Bear in mind that Epstein was funding a lot of science long before he had a (deservedly!) bad reputation to launder. It was a prior genuine interest.
Reply Retweet Like More
Rob Markowitz Sep 16
What’s your point? He was still a fucking monster. There is no justification.
Reply Retweet Like
Stewart Brand Sep 16
Replying to @robseth @GernotWagner
Total monster indeed. What is being sorted now is exactly how and why it took so long to discover and reveal that, so that nothing like it happens again. An apparently genuine interest in science philanthropy turned out to be an effective smoke screen.
Reply Retweet Like
Gernot Wagner Sep 15
Replying to @stewartbrand
Let's call it reputation pre-wash, essential for particularly persistent stains.
Reply Retweet Like
Seamus Blackley Sep 16
This is a 10 point tweet.
Reply Retweet Like
Xeni Jardin Sep 16
Stewart you really don’t know when to shut up do you
Reply Retweet Like
Jonathan Eisen Sep 16
Well at least we now know where stands on the issue - Jeffrey Epstein was just a science fan
Reply Retweet Like
PZ Myers 🕷 Sep 16
Gosh. Maybe he should have used his economic security and wealth to go back to school and study the sciences, if he was that interested. If I had millions of dollars, there's a long list of gear I'd sink money into for my lab. A jet and a collection of girls aren't on it.
Reply Retweet Like
PZ Myers 🕷 Sep 16
Science groupies are not qualified to determine where scientific funding goes, nor do they have expertise we should admire. Enthusiasm is great, but it's not enough.
Reply Retweet Like
JS C0Ifman Sep 16
Because before that it was just bad behavior.
Reply Retweet Like
gawain Sep 16
did not expect Epstein to take down Lessig and Brand. But here we are.
Reply Retweet Like