41–50 of 547 posts
Until yesterday, everyone was in awe and gender was nowhere in the picture. But political people will use this for their propaganda (can already see references on social media), unfortunately. Fortunately, gender identity/politics is not the factor for talented people.
Relevant repository - https://github.com/achael/eht-imaging
Katie's paper on VLBI reconstruction: https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.01413
This is how I learned about the topic and I think it's well suited for computery folks, since it was published in CVPR.
This is extremely misleading and fake news. 200 scientists from 40 countries participated in the project [1], not just this one. Saying that she's the one "behind the first black hole image" is clearly pushing for some propaganda, ignoring all other people work. I have also seen countless tweets on Twitter that feature both her picture and Margaret Hamilton, saying that "The first one took us to Moon, and the second…
Katie Bouman was the scientist in charge of the project of taking the enormous amount of data and translating that into an actual image. Not only does the article state that the larger project has 200 people working on it, Dr Bouman comments that her team deserves equal credit.
There is no problem with celebrating some of the leaders of projects. We all know Tim Berners Lee didn't single handedly install AOL into our houses but he's still known as the father of the internet because that's how media works - they publicize people who have been crucial in specific work. We don't need a conspiracy theory to explain this.
There have been countless threads over the years where a man gets the credit for something a team has worked on and there is practically never any comments about this. For once a woman gets credit and this thread is full of people complaining that there was an entire team.
Yes, there was a team, but that doesn't matter. For once a woman is getting credit for the great work they've done and this should be applauded. Stories like this help bring more women into STEM fields. Anyone who is complaining about the lack of fairness in this is making themselves look ignorant by ignoring the last thousand years of scientific progress.
I'm not biased anyway but thinking Is it fair to attribute this entire thing to one person leaving out the team of collaborators? Doesn't it sound like what happens with Jobsism? Edit: While I'm being rapidly downvoted, I'd like to clarify that I didn't mean to demean this because it's a female nor any of the feat this research has achieved. My point was only about why is it reported as if individual feat while many…
I'm annoyed because of the breathless coverage. One would see less hyperbole if a dog had done the work. The worst thing is how soul crushing academia is. I left my physics PhD when I actually started talking to my colleagues and seeing my career trajectory. I bailed as soon as I realized I will be working until my 40s on the per hour pay of a fast food employee. I do not see why you want to push women to a field tha…
Katie gave a TED talk: https://youtu.be/BIvezCVcsYs
I'm not biased anyway but thinking Is it fair to attribute this entire thing to one person leaving out the team of collaborators? Doesn't it sound like what happens with Jobsism? Edit: While I'm being rapidly downvoted, I'd like to clarify that I didn't mean to demean this because it's a female nor any of the feat this research has achieved. My point was only about why is it reported as if individual feat while many…
How would you rate "Meet Robert Oppenheimer, father of the bomb"?
I'd also love anyone to point me to any similar discussion on Elon Musk and one of his companies.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> https://github.com/achael/eht-imaging/graphs/contributors Huh, I wonder how accurate this is. All the code is beyond me in any case, I'm in no position to judge the relative value of any of it.
I'm not sure what the idea behind posting this is? In a large scale project rarely does someone high up the command chain do any of the "grunt" work (i.e. programming). Also, by training she appears to be dealing more with theory than the actual implementation aspect of this all.
* achael 566 commits 850,275 ++ 131,044 --
* klbouman 90 commits 2,410 ++ 1,265 --
However, at least at the level of reading the commit messages, Katie's are pretty math heavy:
"fixed bug in the fake briggs weighting"
"starting to fix chirp problems with polrep"
"made it possible to do a min uv cut on closure phase when adding it a..."
While Andrew's lean frequently toward code maintenance:
"updated some docstrings in imager_utils"
"moved imgsum to plotting.summary_plots"
"modified README"
That said, Andrew and others seem to have pretty good insight too.
I've read comments on Hacker News for many years, often finding them a useful source of additional information and insight into details from whatever the linked piece is. Sometimes these threads are full of only subtly veiled hatred and leave me with a feeling of disgust. This thread is one of those. There have been countless threads over the years where a man gets the credit for something a team has worked on and th…
The sheer toxicity of many of the comments is something I haven't seen for a long time. They really hate that a women is getting credit and that others aren't getting the same level of attention.
I wonder how those same people think about Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs etc. They had huge teams behind them as well.