>You are ignoring my point. No one is doubting that Minsky associated with Epstein.
i am not. your point is that since he was a famous academic his name was as easily recognizable as dershowitz and pinker, who are generally famous.
>What would be valid evidence of truth would be something like a third party (like, say, Greg Benford) confirming it.
sorry that's not what we as a society has deemed sufficient proof. though you are welcome relitigate literally all of common law dating back to the magna carta though if you believe it should be otherwise.
>Minsky was the oracle of AI, the head of the MIT AI Lab. He influenced AI from the 1950s to the 1990s.
means literally nothing to general public and therefore doesn't substantiate your claim.
>And what is 'Society of Mind' but a popularization, widely read?
i concede this one. i was not aware of this book.
>Oh, well, that settles it. I'm glad we had this discussion about critical thinking.
so do you then doubt all depositions or just the ones that implicate oracles of AI?
>The deposition only claims that she was told to have sex with Minsky, and not, as far as any media coverage I've seen goes, that she actually did, and Greg Benford states he was there and that Minsky turned her down: https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/339725/
my point was only about the validity of her testimony. yours (initially) was the defense of minksy.