• UnpopularCrow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    192
    ·
    18 days ago

    She was on one of the teams that did if I remember correctly. I believe they split up into three teams and developed algorithms independently from one another. What surprised everyone was when they came back, all three teams had more or less the same image. It’s been a while so I may be wrong on some details. But it wasn’t just her is my point.

    • Maggoty@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      58
      ·
      17 days ago

      For the number of times women were straight up erased from their scientific achievements I think we can keep choosing them to represent the team for a bit.

      • GottaKnowYourCHKN@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        17 days ago

        This. Men got so angry when this story dropped and took personal offense to the fact a woman did something important and valuable. The amount of times women have had their work stolen and taken credit for by some bro far outweighs the recognition.

        • Maalus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          17 days ago

          Or maybe attribute everyone equally - regardless of gender / sex, since that doesn’t matter to what they do? You don’t fix injustice with more injustice by skipping the contributions of other teams and only singleing her out.

          • angrystego@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            17 days ago

            Science is teamwork, but the contribution of different team members is usually not all the same. There’s no way for us to know who did most of the important work. We have to put trust in the team that they chose their representative fairly.

            • Maalus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              ·
              17 days ago

              You replied to the person explaining this and ignored all of it - she was one out of 3 teams, each using different methods to arrive at the same conclusion. They simply made a photo of her when she got a result and was excited. They didn’t “choose a representative”. She said “everyone deserves the credit”. So why are you pushing this, instead of saying “all the teams deserve credit and this is a cool photo”?

              • angrystego@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                17 days ago

                I do think the other teams deserve credit as well, just like her team does. I thought it was discussed whether it was right for her to represent her team.

                Also, the fact that there were 3 teams doesn’t mean we cannot celebrate the happiness of one of their leaders.

      • toasteecup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        17 days ago

        I’m fine with this.

        As long as the team gets recognition in the more formal documents then let the media have whoever they’d like.

        It’s like doing set up for a show. Let the headliner be the focus but acknowledging the people who made it happen is really nice.

        • Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          17 days ago

          Definitely, I’ve not heard of any shenanigans with their paper. So they still get credit. It’s just not a media headline.

    • angrystego@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      17 days ago

      It’s almost never just one person, science is teamwork, but that doesn’t mean she’s not an excellent scientist and project leader worthy of the buzz surrounding her research. Let’s let her have the spotlight she deserves.

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    64
    ·
    edit-2
    17 days ago

    This is her youtube channel. If you haven’t read the paper on this algorithm, I think you can get a good intuitive understanding by watching the two videos she has on there from (what looks like) her thesis, and I think it becomes clear why she was selected to lead this project.

    Specifically, these two videos:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfGvPinTJUs

    and

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7NhQ7WkbHms

    So, consider that these two videos are basically the “one-dimensional” solution, or one pin-hole camera example. In the approach that her and her team to image the black hole, they used many, many radio antennas’, all acting in concert in a not-too different version of what she did her for the work on her YT channel.

    • qaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      too bad - that you leached on your senior collaborators who did ALL and every intellectual part of the project - all for your credit; you are what I call an instagram scientist - too bad for science that such people who do any third-rate cheating act for publicity - like Katie Bouman exists @JosephDT

      Seems like somebody is unhappy with her being chosen

      • johannesvanderwhales@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        17 days ago

        At the same time the media kinda picked her out as the face of this project when there were many other people involved. I think she even said as much.

        • rooroo@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 days ago

          Yeah and IIRC the dude the Internet misogynists decided was responsible for most of the code said ‘Shut up everyone I did some leg work, but she did the heavy lifting.’ Plus he’s queer or something else which would have had those fuckers in shambles had they known.

          • ContrarianTrail@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            17 days ago

            When speaking of memes, most people think of internet memes. The likes of which this and every other meme community is full of. That’s not what Dawkins means by a meme. What he means by it is a cultural analog to genes. A trait that passes from person to person as an idea or behavior. Shaking hands would an example of such meme.

            Internet meme on the other hand generally comes in the form of a picture which is funny, ironic or relateable.

            • boonhet@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              17 days ago

              Ideas more broadly = information

              Just about any information that self-replicates it using humans, could be considered a meme.

            • angrystego@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              17 days ago

              Yes, but it’s still also a meme in the Dawkins’ sense of the word, isn’t it? Or would it be classified as a memetic complex? I think it’s probably simple enough to be cathegorised as a meme.

  • rtxn@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    18 days ago

    Dude in the back is looking at the result with the same intensity as a teenager seeing boobs for the first time.

  • werefreeatlast@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    17 days ago

    Photographers worldwide have accepted the challenge. They will bring assistants to pull and tape the hands off the face. They will make her look at an eagle or birdie far off in the distance as one does. Don’t worry, this lady will be ready for her one page in highschool books.