Live data from Hacker News

NASA names headquarters after first Black female engineer Mary W. Jackson

axios.com

71–80 of 111 posts

Re: NASA names headquarters after first Black female engineer Mary W. Jackson

#71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mate, shut up with the nonsense. There are many scientific concepts that originated in Asian/MiddleEastern civilizations that simply happen to have a European name because the latter person popularized it in the West.

the reason "politics" are so derided on this website is because these guys can't stop themselves from impulsively showing their true colors (and exposing the very endemic racism at hand in the process!) at the drop of a hat

Please point out the racism in the comment you're talking about.

Re: NASA names headquarters after first Black female engineer Mary W. Jackson

#72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The majority of things are named after white men to the exclusion of everyone else. That's because the majority of scientific achievements to date, have been by white men. I'm not celebrating that fact, I'm just pointing out the source of the statistic you've pointed out. The things weren't named because the person was a white male, they were named because of a tremendous achievement that happened to be made by a w…

I would argue that the level of success and contribution despite racism, which is a significant hurdle, makes it so that nothing is being inflated. Also I get your point that at NASA and in the USA we have mostly white scientist until recently, but I take issue with your statement about the majority of scientific achievements. Historically there are thousands upon thousands of Arab and Chinese scientific achievements…

Why should the US put up statues of people that weren't not from the United States? Yes, there were plenty of scientific achievements in centuries gone by. But there is a big difference between not putting up statues of Chinese-Americans, and not putting up statues of people from ancient China. Those are two completely incomparable celebrations of success. There will be many people from thousands of years ago who made discoveries who we will never know about. That's not the point here.

Re: NASA names headquarters after first Black female engineer Mary W. Jackson

#73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is nothing meritorious about being black, or being a female, or being white, or being male. You cannot choose your race, or your biological sex. You didn't earn these traits, and you aren't a better or worse human being for having any of them. The NASA HQ was named after somebody to celebrate traits they didn't earn or choose. There are plenty of engineers that were objectively better engineers (I'm sure there…

> If their achievements were that incredible, we would've heard much more about them. No? Minorities are marginalized all the time.

[deleted]

Re: NASA names headquarters after first Black female engineer Mary W. Jackson

#74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope you're joking. There is nothing more dishonoring and patronizing than to change the goal posts for somebody, just because of their race.

Speaking from your vast experience as a POC, I'm sure. I guess you'd be ok if I spoke for white people?

Yeah, I'm okay with other people having opinions. Please share yours rather than telling people who can and can't have one.

Re: NASA names headquarters after first Black female engineer Mary W. Jackson

#75
This is Hollywoodification. They’re not naming it after Mary Jackson because she’s the first black NASA engineer, but because Hollywood made a movie about her.

If some historian digs up a previous African American engineer, will they change the name? No.

A while ago the Federal Marshall Service wanted to name their headquarters after Wyatt Earp. There was outrage, and they backed off.

Something tells me that won’t happen here.

Downvote away.

Re: NASA names headquarters after first Black female engineer Mary W. Jackson

#76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I want to remind them we dont live in a meritocratic society The reason I love the sciences is that in general, people are more meritocratic in those circles compared to others. I've found especially in scientific academia that people are far more meritocratic compared to other disciplines. This also applies at science/engineering companies. No, not at all levels (the more business-y you get, the less of a meritocr…

As an actual scientist, no, science is not particularly meritocratic or objective. The current scientific world is highly catered towards people that can afford to devote their 20s and 30s to a low-paying job. Because of in-group dynamics, it also maintains the existing population make-up, which is predominantly white or Asian.

Just because you need to sacrifice your prime years in order to succeed, doesn't mean the system isn't meritorious. What isn't meritorious about needing to work hard even if you're talented? Nobody gets a free ride.

If you mean that gifted people should have their livelihood subsidised by the state, then sure, I'm open to exploring merit based scholarships, and society investing more in the sciences and so on. But nobody gets a prize in science without actually putting in the work and achieving something. Though, admittedly we are seeing that less and less. Society in general is becoming less meritorious (participation awards, etc).

Re: NASA names headquarters after first Black female engineer Mary W. Jackson

#77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I want to remind them we dont live in a meritocratic society The reason I love the sciences is that in general, people are more meritocratic in those circles compared to others. I've found especially in scientific academia that people are far more meritocratic compared to other disciplines. This also applies at science/engineering companies. No, not at all levels (the more business-y you get, the less of a meritocr…

You sound like a man who thinks they diserve recognition yourself and seem to be jealous. Check out your ego, you might become a more beautiful person if you shed some of it

The parent poster presented a series of arguments, and in your response you made nothing but ad hominem atacks. That adds nothing to the discussion, and only serves as a display in pettiness. If you have nothing of value to add then please consider not adding anything at all.

Re: NASA names headquarters after first Black female engineer Mary W. Jackson

#79
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only Neil Armstrong had accomplished something significant outside Hollywood, perhaps then he would be worthy of having a building at Edwards named after him, is what you're saying? (he is a particularly bad exemplar of the point you are trying to make)

Dryden was much more important to NASA than Armstrong was. Armstrong was lucky to be assigned Apollo 11; he was not the best test pilot (having crashed an X-15 due to his own recklessness). If they were going to pick people who greatly contributed to the success of the Apollo program, they should have picked Houbolt.

If only Armstrong had accomplished something that made up for overshooting the runway and scraping the paint on the bottom of an experimental aircraft, perhaps then he'd be worthy of having a building at Edwards named after him. I cannot imagine what sort of act might erase the stain of that kind of universal infamy.

Re: NASA names headquarters after first Black female engineer Mary W. Jackson

#80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mate, shut up with the nonsense. There are many scientific concepts that originated in Asian/MiddleEastern civilizations that simply happen to have a European name because the latter person popularized it in the West.

the reason "politics" are so derided on this website is because these guys can't stop themselves from impulsively showing their true colors (and exposing the very endemic racism at hand in the process!) at the drop of a hat

Maybe, but I think an equally large problem is the habit people have of (i) dichotomizing every issue and (ii) simply painting another person as racist/horrible or otherwise socially unfit. No one can have a real conversation where this is the norm.

Yes, this is a throwaway. Yes, I shouldn't do it. But frankly, it's the only way I would ever comment on something like this. Everyone involved in American culture war subjects is too toxic. Too many norms of debate about almost every topic are toxic. It'll be the end of your country if this continues.

Post reply on HN