But I cant find Katie Bouman's name on the EHT website and all the papers she has on arXiv are group written. And other reports say 200 researchers were on the team.
So my question is- how important were her contributions?
Apparently she "invented the algorithm" but no other details are available.
uns out, she did a sub sub sub part of a programm. A sort of 'adaptor' that just reformats certain data into another format, and then feeds it into the ACTUAL programm.
That misrepresentation of what she actually contributed and what she actually did is nauseing.
Sources :
here, what SHE wrote ( HOPSTOOLS ) :
https://github.com/klbouman/hopstools
Here the mother program, where that optional part of her is added, where it acts as a sort of interface to import one more datatype by reformatting it.
source :
https://github.com/sao-eht/eat/graphs/contributors
btw: that's also NOT an algo, but just reformatting data. You dont understand - she did NOT write and algo at all. sche did NOT write an image tool at all.
What she did code is at max about 4 pages of code - but more importantly - is neither an algo, nor a imaging program
but is an ADAPTOR for a source of data, which reformats the data to feed it into the mother program - of which she contributed that adaptor, which makes up ca 0.01% of said mother program at max AND is marked as "optional" part of the program
sources :
https://github.com/sao-eht/eat/graphs/contributors
---
Her whole bundle ("hopstools") here was merged into the mother programm and counted as one commit of 'mother' program.
hopstools, of which she did at max 25%
Her share on contribution on this actual imaging program is about 0.3% max, but OK lets say 1% -
So she did less than 1/4 of 1% of the work. max. If we're very generous.
And again : HOPSTOOLS is just an adaptor for another dataformat that can be read into the 'mother' programm. that's it.
uns out, she did a sub sub sub part of a programm. A sort of 'adaptor' that just reformats certain data into another format, and then feeds it into the ACTUAL programm.
That misrepresentation of what she actually contributed and what she actually did is nauseing.
Sources :
here, what SHE wrote ( HOPSTOOLS ) :
https://github.com/klbouman/hopstools
Here the mother program, where that optional part of her is added, where it acts as a sort of interface to import one more datatype by reformatting it.
source :
https://github.com/sao-eht/eat/graphs/contributors
btw: that's also NOT an algo, but just reformatting data. You dont understand - she did NOT write and algo at all. sche did NOT write an image tool at all.
What she did code is at max about 4 pages of code - but more importantly - is neither an algo, nor a imaging program
but is an ADAPTOR for a source of data, which reformats the data to feed it into the mother program - of which she contributed that adaptor, which makes up ca 0.01% of said mother program at max AND is marked as "optional" part of the program
sources :
https://github.com/sao-eht/eat/graphs/contributors
---
Her whole bundle ("hopstools") here was merged into the mother programm and counted as one commit of 'mother' program.
hopstools, of which she did at max 25%
Her share on contribution on this actual imaging program is about 0.3% max, but OK lets say 1% -
So she did less than 1/4 of 1% of the work. max. If we're very generous.
And again : HOPSTOOLS is just an adaptor for another dataformat that can be read into the 'mother' programm. that's it.
Sir, this is an Arby's...
The fact you people even give a sh!t about this is revealing
actually this is interesting, because I just read about how she "invented the algorithm while in grad school" on a major news website, and was suspicious given how dishonest the popular press is and that graduate students, particularly in the hard sciences, are part of teams and given projects sponsored by their advisors. so, suspicions confirmed. it's best to confront media dishonesty at all times.
So the media is pushing another 'this girl smart' meme? how surprising!
Intelligence is measured by the number of daily commits, some people who claimed to be intelligent never psuhed a single commit in their life, clearly overrated, look at Einstein for example.
He wondered, as he had many times wondered before, whether he himself was a lunatic. Perhaps a lunatic was simply a minority of one. At one time it had been a sign of madness to believe that the earth goes round the sun; today, to believe that the past is unalterable. He might be ALONE in holding that belief, and if alone, then a lunatic. But the thought of being a lunatic did not greatly trouble him: the horror was that he might also be wrong.
Yes, the way in which the politicized media systematically misrepresents women's contribution to science is absolutely hilarious. In the same way in which google reports search results overemphasizing a certain minority. They don't even realize that every sane person sees liberals for what they are: the parody of themselves. And calling whomever doesn't agree with them a fascist or an incel doesn't really change anything.
So the media is pushing another 'this girl smart' meme? how surprising!Intelligence is measured by the number of daily commits, some people who claimed to be intelligent never psuhed a single commit in their life, clearly overrated, look at Einstein for example.
This... though I have to say that an anonymous post on a web forum for basement dwellers is on par with daily commits as a measure of someone else’s ability. EJMR >>> black hole team!