Good for the Obsever for leading on this.

Movement of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in February-March of this year in Zaporizhia.

I think that if you’re going to write a piece in the Times urging the government to use and boost more AI, the fact that you are paid by a major AI company should be in the first sentence, or at least first paragraph. I also think that the best scenario for AI is that it destroys millions of jobs with the prosperity, dignity and community that goes with them. The worst scenario is the destruction of the human race - a fear openly expressed by an increasing number of senior and experienced AI engineers who are leaving the industry. And somewhere in between a myriad of horrors such as yet more screen learning and screen addiction for our children. But I do see that it will make rich men even richer. And that’s the most important thing of course.

The following email is what I sent my team last night. I sent a similar version to my patients, also. *** You’ve put your trust, your credibility, and your hard work into what we have built together, and I take that responsibility seriously. You deserve a complete and honest account of what did and did not happen. I apologize that I did not get this out sooner, but I want to be thorough. The purpose of the DOJ releasing these documents is clear: to identify individuals who participated in criminal activity, enabled it, or witnessed it. I am not in any of those categories, and there is no evidence to the contrary. To be clear: 1. I was not involved in any criminal activity. 2. My interactions with Epstein had nothing to do with his sexual abuse or exploitation of anyone. 3. I was never on his plane, never on his island, and never present at any sex parties. That said, I apologize and regret putting myself in a position where emails, some of them embarrassing, tasteless, and indefensible, are now public, and that is on me. I accept that reality and the humiliation that comes with it. *** I want to start by directly addressing the email thread that I’ve been asked about the most. In June 2015, I sent Epstein an email with the subject line “Got a fresh shipment.” The email contained a photograph of bottles of metformin, a medication I had just received from the pharmacy for my own use. The subject line referred to the picture of the bottles of medication. He replied with the words “me too” and attached a photograph of an adult woman. I responded with crude, tasteless banter. Reading that exchange now is very embarrassing, and I will not defend it. I’m ashamed of myself for everything about this. At the time, I understood this exchange as juvenile, not a reference to anything dark or harmful. At that point in my career, I had little exposure to prominent people, and that level of access was novel to me. Everything about him seemed excessive and exclusive, including the fact that he lived in the largest home in all of Manhattan, owned a Boeing 727, and hosted parties with the most powerful and prominent leaders in business and politics. I treated that access as something to be quiet about rather than discussed freely with others. One line in that exchange, about his life being outrageous and me not being able to tell anyone, is being interpreted as awareness of wrongdoing. That is not how I meant it at all. What I was referring to, poorly and flippantly, was the discretion commanded by those social and professional circles–the idea that you don’t talk about who you meet, the dinners you attend and the power and influence of the people in those settings. What I wrote in that email reads terribly, and I own that. *** I met Epstein in 2014 through a prominent female healthcare leader while I was raising funds for scientific research. At that time, he was widely known in academic and philanthropic circles as a funder of science and moved openly among credible institutions and public figures. Between summer 2014 and spring 2019, I met with him on approximately seven or eight occasions at his New York City home, regarding research studies and to meet others he introduced me to. I never visited his island or ranch, and I never flew on any of his planes. When I was at his home, it was either meeting with him directly, meeting with small groups of scientists, doctors, or business leaders, and once at a dinner in 2015 with a number of guests including prominent heads of state. In retrospect, the presence and credibility of such venerable people in different orbits led me to make assumptions about him that clouded my judgment in ways it shouldn’t have. I was not his doctor, though several times I answered general medical questions and recommended other providers to him. Shortly after we met, I asked him directly about his 2008 conviction. He characterized it as prostitution-related charges. In 2018, I came to learn this was grossly minimized (more on this below). I was incredibly naïve to believe him. I mistook his social acceptance in the eyes of the credible people I saw him with for acceptability, and that was a serious error in my judgment. To be clear, I never witnessed illegal behavior and never saw anyone who appeared underage in his presence. *** In November 2018 I read the Miami Herald investigative article. I was repulsed by what I learned. Nauseated. It marked a clear and irreversible line between what I knew before and what I understood afterward. At that point, I told him directly he needed to accept responsibility for what he did. Hoping to provide the victims from the Herald piece with support, I contacted a residential trauma facility to understand what funding comprehensive care for many victims would require. (Those communications were between me and the facility and were therefore not part of the document release.) I spoke with him and shared that information and insisted that he fund their care, beginning with residential treatment and followed by lifelong therapy. In hindsight, even attempting to facilitate accountability was a mistake and once again reflected just how naïve I was at the time. Once the full scope of his actions was clear, disengagement should have been the only appropriate response. My intent does not change that, and I regret not drawing that boundary immediately. *** Nothing in this letter is meant to minimize the harm suffered by the young women Epstein abused. Their trauma is permanent. I am not asking for a pass from you. I am not asking anyone to ignore the emails or pretend they aren’t ugly. They simply are. The man I am today, roughly ten years later, would not write them and would not associate with Epstein at all. Whatever growth I’ve had over the past decade does not erase the emails I wrote then. I recognize that my actions and words have consequences for the people I care deeply about, including all of you. I regret the cost this has placed on you, and I take responsibility for it. I won’t ask anyone to defend me or explain this on my behalf. If you have questions or concerns, I’ll address them directly with you, my team.

Crime and punishment. Beginning of accountability?

Dog going on a holiday trip.. 😊