This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. |
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on June 20, 2005. The result of the discussion was Keep. |
I don't know Ito, but this article gives me a bad impression. It's trite. It's sappy. It's a masterpiece of bloviation. It was worse before, and it is still nauseating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.135.164.197 ( talk) 05:41, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
Instead of all this self-absorbed garbage about Joi Ito, lets compare another person's Wikipedia entry that is more appropriate, Craig Newmark. Factual. Brief. To the point. Not all of this bullshit we see in the Joi Ito article, 90% of which is useless crap. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.135.181.179 ( talk) 17:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
Isn't saying "attempted, again, to educate himself" rather rude to the obviously intelligent man? Is there a better way to say this?
Actually, Mizuka and I are not married yet so we are "partners" but not spouses... yet. -- Joi 19:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Maybe they will never marry ("yet"?)... what is the point of having her picture in his Article???? Other wiki article about notable persons usually do not have pictures of their partners?? Can we take this picture out, there is no relevance. -- SasiSasi ( talk) 12:43, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
Well, it means BUSINESS partner, obviously.
No one's gonna put a picture of a GIRLFRIEND in an article like this!!
64.48.78.7 ( talk) 20:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Right, I removed the picture and her first name.... I assume she has a surname(?), if we need her name in the article, it should be her full name. -- SasiSasi ( talk) 08:49, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Go ahead... since this is MySpace and we should invite all living notable persons to post a picture of their girlfriend in their Article. Show me one other notable person article that contains a picture of the girlfriend. -- SasiSasi ( talk) 09:08, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Here we go... "Wikipedia is not a social network such as MySpace or Facebook. You may not host your own website, blog, or wiki at Wikipedia. Wikipedia pages are not: Personal web pages. Wikipedians have their own user pages, but they may be used only to present information relevant to working on the encyclopedia. If you are looking to make a personal webpage or blog or to post your resume, please make use of one of the many free providers on the Internet or any hosting included with your Internet account..."
Also:
"Autobiography Avoid writing or editing articles about yourself, since most of us find objectivity especially difficult when we ourselves are concerned (however it is not impossible.). Contribute on the talk page instead. Feel free to correct mistaken or out-of-date facts about yourself."
Its not "verifiable" and not "sourced" apart from the fact that Joi Ito has edited his own article, which is discouraged as per Wikipedia policy.
Also: "Privacy of names Caution should be applied when naming individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event. When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed (such as in certain court cases), it is often preferable to omit it, especially when doing so does not result in a significant loss of context. When evaluating the inclusion or removal of names, their publication in secondary sources other than news media, such as scholarly journals or the work of recognized experts, should be afforded greater weight than the brief appearance of names in news stories. Editors should take particular care when considering whether inclusion of the names of private, living individuals who are not directly involved in an article's topic adds significant value. The presumption in favor of the privacy of family members of articles' subjects and other loosely involved persons without independent notability is correspondingly stronger. In all cases where the redaction of names is considered, editors should be willing to discuss the issue on the article's talk page."
I think the fundamental problem is that Joi has started editing his own article heavily, without his involvement we would not have a picture of the lady in the first place, and would not have a discussion about this. I fail to see how a picture of his girlfriend is relevant to the article (as he is notable in a professional capacity, not for his private life). Just because something is a free image does not mean we have to include it in Wikipedia. -- SasiSasi ( talk) 09:34, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
We agree that we disagree on that one then. If you think that a encyclopaedia should include private pictures of non-notable girlfriends (only identified by their first name), that’s fine by me (thankfully this has not yet become the norm in Wikipedia).... I just hope Joi let us know when they break up (or finally marry), so we can update the article accordingly, it would be a shame if we or anybody else in the world should miss this absolutely relevant and important piece of information.--
SasiSasi (
talk)
10:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Let me be the tiebreaker. Who the *bleep* CARES who he's dating?!
You led me to believe it was his BUSINESS partner. If it's just some babe he's shacked up with in Chiba, it doesn't deserve even a MENTION here!
If she is actively involved in his business and/or philanthropy (as, say, Melinda Gates), I would say a mention is in order. Not a photo. Unless it's a photo of them together cutting a ribbon or something. Or unless she is famous in her own right and you want to say "He's been linked to...".
But if she's just some nobody in the background -- as evidenced by the fact that we don't even know her FULL NAME (!) -- well then, let her remain in the "background"....
I.e. no photo, no name, no mention.
My two cents. 64.48.78.8 ( talk) 12:40, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, well, I understand they have a meaningful relationship, its not just quick sex in Chiba! Why would we otherwise have to discuss her picture in his article at lengths.
Is there anyway we can refer this issue to an administrator, to get it settled??
At the very least put in her surname!!! I feel offended on her behalf that she is not even worthy of a surname, just a decorative picture (the fact that her surname is not provided may have something to do with the fact that people originally thought she was his wife). If we had her surname we might also be able to establish if she is noteworthy in her own right, than we can move that picture to her own article (after all this is the 21st Century and she might be more than just “the pretty girlfriend”). -- SasiSasi ( talk) 15:07, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
> the fact that her surname is not provided may have something to do with the fact that people originally thought she was his wife
i dunno about wife, but the fact that his SISTER has a nearly identical name and *IS* his business "partner" (in some ventures) led me to assume that was HER.
BTW, I checked Ted Turner's wiki (only entrepreneur I could think of offhand who's not married) and, surprise surprise, it has THIS note: "Turner is reportedly involved with several women, including the novelist and playwright Elizabeth Dewberry."
What?! Not a single photo?!
How odd. Surely we should have a full GALLERY of those "several women"...all of whom I suspect are more prominent than Madame Coffeeshop...I dunno...at least they might have SURNAMES.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.48.78.19 ( talk) 00:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Mizuka's full name is Mizuka Kurogane.
Christopher Lee Adams (
talk)
23:46, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
64.48.78.19 ( talk) 00:42, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
I will change the article to "his longterm partner Mizuka Kurogane", cant think of a more appropiate term than "longterm partner" in English, any alternative suggestions welcome. -- SasiSasi ( talk) 19:15, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
"Longterm partner" does sound better than plain ole "partner", but I still think it sounds like a business partner in a bio like this. If someone refered to Bill Gates' "long-term partner", I would immediately think of Balmer et al.
I think one way to diffuse this would be to insert an OCCUPATION for Ms Kurogane: "...his longterm partner, actress Mizuka Kurogane" or "...his longterm partner, bank teller Mizuka Kurogane" etc.
Or "coffee shop owner", as I suspect from that photo! 64.48.78.4 ( talk) 08:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Man, we are stumbling over just about every pitfall there is in the 21st Century... -- SasiSasi ( talk) 17:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
What is the politically correct way of referring to someone whose primary job/pride/focus is taking care of the home? -- Joi ( talk) 00:46, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
"Ito is Timothy Leary's godson." There is no mention of a godson on the Timothy Leary article. ;-) Reference needed! ( Yosofun 07:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC))
I've been talking to some of the admins in the IRC channel and it is my understanding that I can edit my own article to clean up formating, grammar, etc. so I may do this from time to time. Although, I would rather have someone else do it. ;-P -- Joi 14:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
"On the long tail"???? Nan da, sore?! 64.48.78.7 ( talk) 20:55, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
How do I get rid of this: {{Cleanup|date=September 2007}} ?? -- Joi 15:01, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Don't want to add things directly to my page, but if someone could review the following references and add them to my article if it makes sense, that would be great. Thanks. -- Joi 00:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
The "Cyber-Elite" business is from "Time digital" October 1997 p.57 -- Joi 00:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Timothy Leary calls me his godson in this video. [2] -- Joi 00:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
I invested in and joined the board of Rupture founded by Shawn Fanning - Joi ( talk) 14:38, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Is that really your photo? You're a dead ringer for some Japanese celeb!
Can't remember who...maybe it was a Nikkei celeb now that I think about it....
Anyone know?
64.48.78.7 ( talk) 21:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Why is there no mention of Jonkichi, We Know and falling asleep at the keyboard? :-P (AKA Allyn) JS747 ( talk) 13:15, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
The talk page seems to be out of order date wise? No biggie, just sort of hard to follow. Also, in the info box, it has this persons schools listed with "drop out" in parenthases, is this standard? Cheers, -- 70.109.223.188 ( talk) 19:14, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
A few factual additions/deletions if anyone has time and is interested in doing update...
I'm now a Senior Visiting Researcher of Keio Research Institute at SFC. see program on this page as a neutral source: http://www.hct.ac.ae/news/aspx/ViewDetails.aspx?newsid=159
Joined the board of Machinima.com. See: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-10083692-52.html
Annenberg Center for Communication no longer exists so I am not a fellow there anymore. -- Joi ( talk) 02:41, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Finally got you your Davis Guggenheim headshot User:SasiSasi
-- Joi ( talk) 11:04, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
I guess the old "partner vs. spouse" debate has finally been resolved ;-) http://joi.ito.com/weblog/2008/12/03/we-got-married.html Mizuka and Joi just got married. I'm replacing "longterm partner" with wife, please make any other appropriate changes. -- Skyfaller ( talk) 09:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
"Doctoral Candidate" in my studies at Hitotsubashi is redirected to Doctor of Philosophy, but it's actually a Doctor of Business Administration that I'm getting (DBA) not a PhD. -- Joi ( talk) 06:44, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Not going to add these myself, but if anyone has time, maybe add them to the references. I'll try to keep this section updated with stuff that isn't in the article.
Someone removed Limelight in Chicago from my article saying that there wasn't a Limelight in Chicago, but in fact there was.
Here's the edit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Joi_Ito&action=historysubmit&diff=367980220&oldid=367962351
You can see in The Limelight article that there was in fact a Chicago Limelight.
-- Joi ( talk) 11:51, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Joi Ito. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Joi Ito. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 18:26, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Joi Ito. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 12:36, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Joi Ito. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://joiwiki.ito.com/joiwiki/index.cgi?joi_itoWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:50, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Joi Ito. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:24, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Joi Ito. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:46, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
This article is very difficult to edit today, however, I am attempting to limit the number of times the lead states allegations. It would be great if Wikipedians could stop to read first before adding more repetition. - SusanLesch ( talk) 23:37, 7 September 2019 (UTC)
There is a big gap in this article between 1985 and 1995 -- there is nothing that explains how Joi Ito's career got to the point where he became a board member of various organizations. There is almost no development described, just his later activities.
In the Education section it states "Keio University PhD". What does it refer to and is there any evidence of this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.146.62.121 ( talk) 14:58, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Ito resigned from his roles at MIT, Harvard, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Knight Foundation, PureTech Health, and The New York Times Company on September 7, 2019, following allegations of financial ties to sex offender and financier Jeffrey Epstein.
Every coffee shop I've ever patronized has "financial ties" to my sordid life. But we don't hold this against them, because no patron with shirt and shoes and at least a superficial semblance of personal and civic hygiene is ever refused.
From Alex Vermeer quoting Rodney Brooks:
In The Emotion Machine, Marvin Minsky discusses suitcase words—words that contain a variety of meanings packed into them, such as conscience, emotions, consciousness, experience, thinking, morality, right, and wrong.
The word 'consciousness' is used to describe a wide range of activities, such as "how we reason and make decisions, how we represent our intentions, and how we know what we've recently done [p128]."
If we want to better understand the various meanings of consciousness we need to analyse each one separately, rather than treating it as a single concept.
"Financial ties" is not a suitcase word by this definition, but does belong to a nearby category I was inspired to create for myself of trombone words: words with a wide, unstated range of zeal. My financial ties to my local coffee shops fall at the low end of that range. Progressing upwards from there, the word encompasses fifty different shades of grey.
Absolutely critical to this article is to distinguish Ito as:
We have strong evidence to home in on menu item 3.3 right from the outset here, because L. Rafael Reif is not even contesting his signature and oversight committee involvement in the original oversight process, after which point, Farrow's reportage shades to shameless:
The M.I.T. Media Lab, which has been embroiled in a scandal over accepting donations from the financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, had a deeper fund-raising relationship with Epstein than it has previously acknowledged, and it attempted to conceal the extent of its contacts with him.
Dozens of pages of e-mails and other documents obtained by The New Yorker reveal that, although Epstein was listed as "disqualified" in M.I.T.'s official donor database, the Media Lab continued to accept gifts from him, consulted him about the use of the funds, and, by marking his contributions as anonymous, avoided disclosing their full extent, both publicly and within the university.
Everyone involved knew of Epstein's criminal record as a sex offender, yet higher administration scheduled a meeting to discuss among themselves whether they might nevertheless take his money. If the "disqualification" list functions as Farrow wishes to imply—as the Eliot Ness of no-mess rectitude—that meeting never happens. (What every overburdened administrator craves is the opportunity to add another discussion point with no marginal upside to the agenda for their next airless assembly.)
Menu item 3.3 is an ever-popular institutional compromise. No sane individual wishes to go 100% rogue, so initial permission is sought on some kind of paper trail (it may be deeply buried paper trail stored in a nondescript warehouse beside the Ark of the Covenant, but it's secure enough to not accidentally die in a fire). But on the other hand, you never please your superiors by getting their hands dirtier than necessary, so the initial Rx is implicitly a bottomless cup with no in-built refill limit.
What we must not do in a BLP is allow the trombone phrase "financial ties" to implicitly suggest that Ito went rogue in his role as an administrative caretaker of the institution he represented. It's an entirely different crime to drag someone else into your muck unwittingly. What he did outside of MIT on his own account is an entirely different moral realm. For one thing, in this realm you can honourably fall on your own sword, without also being actively and aggressively tossed into a pit of alligators and spikes by your formerly trusting colleagues now racing to the exit to distance themselves from a bad smell. It's one thing to stain your own reputation, it's entirely another thing to stain the reputations of others, unwittingly.
At this juncture, Farrow could show up to double down: if Epstein is formally on MIT's no-fly list, and Ito is the PR face the MIT (he was), then he should have kept his private entrepreneurial life equally spick and span. (Almost inevitably, the hypocrisy involved in the moral calculus of guilt by association is thick enough to chew, but that's not immediately pertinent here.)
Only we know for certain that MIT was not Eliot Ness in their own administration of their own no-fly list. In fact, the "disqualified" annotation in M.I.T.'s official donor database might have been a hypocritical PR facade right from the get go. The film Belle de Jour puns on "belle de nuit" (lady of the night). We all understand that prostitution is an institution of the night: if you're doing it in broad daylight, you've jumped the shark. Raising money often degenerates into a form of prostitution: your success on the whole is inversely proportional to how much you care where it comes from. Squeaky clean money is hard to get. (And not just because squeaky clean billionaires are thin on the ground to begin with; the philanthropic impulse often burns brightest in the dankest corridors.)
Perhaps M.I.T.'s official donor database only thoroughly disqualifies Belle de Jours.
If that's the institutional context that Ito was operating within (why else would he even refer the question to committee?; why else would the committee even meet to discuss this?; why else would L. Rafael Reif now be distressed to confess his formal signature on a very embarrassing document?) then his subsequent minimal and perhaps evasive reporting standard is best viewed as institutional capture rather than outright rogue malfeasance.
Shouldn't the standards of BLP and innocence before proven guilty suffice to restrict our trombone insinuations to the right crime?
Ito's financial ties come in three stripes:
All we need to do to silence the trombone of overly broad insinuation is to hoist material from citation Preliminary fact-finding about MIT and Jeffrey Epstein in the final lead sentence.
I'm 100% with Lessig that waiting until after the lead to clarify the blunt trombone does not constitute justice here.
But I'm too hot-headed right now about this to dive in myself, and I've said what I intended to say (if it falls on deaf ears, restatement will not rescue my point), and so I will now simply move along and leave this for the next editor to adjudicate.
— MaxEnt 20:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
Contrary to certain media reports, neither Epstein nor his foundations were ever coded as “disqualified” in MIT’s donor database. Further, designation as “disqualified” does not mean that a person or entity is prohibited from donating to the Institute; rather, the term refers to any donor who is inactive or no longer interested in giving to MIT.
MIT releases results of fact-finding on engagements with Jeffrey Epstein - MIT News Office, January 10, 2020