Earlier quoted context omitted.
> However, I think to call her "the woman behind the first black hole image" is a hyperbole. It makes it sound as if she was _the one person_ responsible that all this came about. It doesn't say that though. It says she was behind the image. And as I understand she lead one of the teams responsible for creating the image from the data. So I don't think that is particularly inaccurate as far as headlines go.
Well luckily we can verify just how much code she actually committed to the project. The Event Horizon Telescope Analysis Toolkit is a publicly available repository on Github: https://github.com/sao-eht/eat according to Katie's profile klbouman, she was responsible for a subset of that toolkit known as hopstools - which is described in the readme as "tools to convert data from the HOPS format": https://github.com/klb…
Katie Bouman, the computer scientist behind the first black hole image
391–400 of 547 posts
Re: Katie Bouman, the computer scientist behind the first black hole image
#392Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm reluctant to even dignify this kind of low-effort drivel with a response. There's a bunch of other commits linked from that very same user profile, related to -- and this will blow your mind -- image reconstruction: https://github.com/achael/eht-imaging/commits?author=klbouma... Even if that were not true, scientific code often does not end up public, let alone on github. Not to mention that Dr. Bouman is the fir…
You're right that we "don't see anyone scrutinizing public commit counts when it's a man in a similar context". Well of course! The media never promotes an inflated story of a man's accomplishments due to him being a man, so it would be silly to suspect it. Nobody is doubting that it is possible for a woman to do impressive science. It's just the ordinary problem of trying to promote/advance/assist a particular group…
Re: Katie Bouman, the computer scientist behind the first black hole image
#393Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lines of code is not, and will never be a metric for gauging project contribution. Most of that 850,000 lines of code is likely boilerplate setup code.
850,000 loc vs what looks to be an initial commit and a merge: https://github.com/klbouman/hopstools/commits?author=klbouma... if I'm wrong here please point it out
You're an idiot. She's been at this almost longer than you've had a job.
Re: Katie Bouman, the computer scientist behind the first black hole image
#394Her story is trully inspiring! She seems like a really likable person, has been hard working, with great results, making a major contribution. The photo with her and the hard drives is amazing and I am sure she will inspire many to enter science. However, I think to call her "the woman behind the first black hole image" is a hyperbole. It makes it sound as if she was _the one person_ responsible that all this came ab…
Re: Katie Bouman, the computer scientist behind the first black hole image
#395Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is exactly the kind of comment that make these threads toxic. Gender, like it or not, shapes the life experience of an individual. Why would you not want to have a role model that had a similar life experience to your own? Except, inevitably, when a woman expresses that desire, it gets called "toxic feminism", and the justification is, wait for it: the personal anecdotes and experiences of a male. I am shocked t…
So the personal life experience of a male doesn't count for anything? THAT is what I would call the actual toxic attitude. What makes women unable to have male role models, but men able to have female role models? Is there a difference between men and women, then? Is that what you are saying? By that logic, why shouldn't I as a man say "fuck women in STEM", because apparently we will never be able to communicate abou…
Ah yes, the classic: "I'm not toxic, you are!".
Where in my original comment did I say the male perspective, anecdotal as it may be in a given context, counts for nothing?
I didn't.
What I did say was that a singular, anecdotal male perspective was not appropriate as a justification for depicting a woman desiring a similarly-gendered role model was somehow indicative of "toxic feminism".
>What makes women unable to have male role models, but men able to have female role models?
No one said they couldn't, but you're depicting what was said as far more benign than it really was. You didn't ask an open-ended question about it, you specifically categorized said desire as "toxic feminism".
>if that is your attitude, STEM may be better off without you anyway. After all, science is about keeping an open mind, among other things.
Maybe one of the STEM fields will be able to develop a device that can accurately measure the immense amount of irony bundled up in that sentence.
Same merry-go-round as usual in these threads:
Subtly patronizing comment(mansplaining if you will), someone points out "hey that's kind of toxic", original commenter retreats to victimhood and "I'm not toxic, you are! No one has an open mind about this kind of thing etc...", and around we go.
If you want to pretend like STEM doesn't have a centuries-long history of fairly uneven footing for other genders and minorities, and accuse everyone of suddenly being close-minded and toxic, fine, but you're going to have a hard time cashing in the victim card when someone points out the ridiculousness of it.
Re: Katie Bouman, the computer scientist behind the first black hole image
#396Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm reluctant to even dignify this kind of low-effort drivel with a response. There's a bunch of other commits linked from that very same user profile, related to -- and this will blow your mind -- image reconstruction: https://github.com/achael/eht-imaging/commits?author=klbouma... Even if that were not true, scientific code often does not end up public, let alone on github. Not to mention that Dr. Bouman is the fir…
You're right that we "don't see anyone scrutinizing public commit counts when it's a man in a similar context". Well of course! The media never promotes an inflated story of a man's accomplishments due to him being a man, so it would be silly to suspect it. Nobody is doubting that it is possible for a woman to do impressive science. It's just the ordinary problem of trying to promote/advance/assist a particular group…
Stories about men aren't thought of as being inflated "due to him being a man" because the default perspective is that men make history. Now that more awareness is being given to the contributions of overlooked women and members of other disenfranchised groups, people seem more eager to think that someone is being celebrated because of their identity.
> Nobody is doubting that it is possible for a woman to do impressive science.
Women's contributions to science and engineering have long been overlooked, if not outright doubted. Fran Allen's (the first woman to win the Turing Award) chapter in "Coders at Work" [0] is a good example.
> Seibel: So when you won the Turing, did you think to yourself, "Gee, there's another woman who should have won this a long time ago?"
> Allen: Well, the very first thing I thought about was how wonderful it was. And then I started to think about all the many other women who were never recognized at all for their work. In many cases, their work was stolen. I thought about the women who had done some very amazing things that have not been recognized, even by their peers. When I approach them and say, "You need to join some professional organizations-I'll write some recommendations for you," they kind of shy away from that.
> Seibel: So you think that part of the problem is they don't get recognized because they're not putting themselves in a place to be recognized as easily.
> Allen: Right.
> Seibel: Are there any particular folks that you would like to name-to give a little recognition now?
> Allen: Well, there's Edith Schonberg, who is a great computer scientist. In terms of technical work, it's just one first after another on some of her papers. She's had work stolen-absolutely brutally stolen. She wrote a paper on debugging of parallel code, which is a very hard problem. It was not accepted at a conference and somebody who had been on the program committee made three papers out of it. That kind of thing. It happens in our field and we don't have good ways of dealing with it.
> Seibel: And it happens more to women?
> Allen: Yes, I think it does. They were often viewed as not going to put up a fight-that they were more isolated and don't have the advocates who will deal with a famous thief. He was a famous thief, known but nobody dared touch it. And there are plenty of others way back from the Stretch days. There was a woman who essentially was the inventor of multiprogramming and credit was taken by somebody who eventually became a Turing Award winner.*
Peter Seibel. Coders at Work: Reflections of the Craft of Programming (Kindle Locations 6413-6419). Kindle Edition.
Re: Katie Bouman, the computer scientist behind the first black hole image
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
Every media article I've read cites her team-credit emphasis. What more should the media do? "Faceless, nameless team does X, No film at 11 in case that might make someone look like they're getting too much credit."? Every team has a leader ( de facto or otherwise). Having one voice, one face for a globe-spanning team effort is the way the media can convey the amazing, awesome message to the masses in a relatable way…
> Every media article I've read cites her team-credit emphasis. But that is the problem, actually. Simple question: Is Prof Bouman the team leader that held all this together? In answering this, consider this is from the ERC website, which is the major funding body of the project: > Since 2014, this six year research project is being carried out by three lead scientists and their teams; namely Professors Heino Falcke…
Why does this bother you so much? What do you lose by her getting credit? Or anyone? What actual harm is it doing?
Re: Katie Bouman, the computer scientist behind the first black hole image
#398Earlier quoted context omitted.
> However, I think to call her "the woman behind the first black hole image" is a hyperbole. It makes it sound as if she was _the one person_ responsible that all this came about. It doesn't say that though. It says she was behind the image. And as I understand she lead one of the teams responsible for creating the image from the data. So I don't think that is particularly inaccurate as far as headlines go.
Well luckily we can verify just how much code she actually committed to the project. The Event Horizon Telescope Analysis Toolkit is a publicly available repository on Github: https://github.com/sao-eht/eat according to Katie's profile klbouman, she was responsible for a subset of that toolkit known as hopstools - which is described in the readme as "tools to convert data from the HOPS format": https://github.com/klb…
Re: Katie Bouman, the computer scientist behind the first black hole image
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lines of code is not, and will never be a metric for gauging project contribution. Most of that 850,000 lines of code is likely boilerplate setup code.
850,000 loc vs what looks to be an initial commit and a merge: https://github.com/klbouman/hopstools/commits?author=klbouma... if I'm wrong here please point it out
Re: Katie Bouman, the computer scientist behind the first black hole image
#400Serious question HN: If Katie was a man do you think people would be going through git histories and their published papers trying to determine if she is being over-credited for her achievements?
People are already doing this on Reddit[0][1], and it's pretty silly because they obviously have no idea how Github or scientific research works. There's an effort underway to undermine Katie Bouman's contributions and it's absolutely ridiculous. Edit: I just checked Twitter, apparently there are thousands of idiots who believe this "850,000/900,000 lines written by Andrew, therefore he wrote the algorithm" narrative…
[0] https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/bbql1i/this_is_dr_kat...