5 thoughts on “Il buco nero del suprematismo rosa”

1. Il linguaggio in uso comune in molti laboratori scientifici di analisi è Python.
   Scrivere un programma im python di solito significa prendere alcune librerie ( tipo mattoncini lego ma molto più complessi) e unirli per fagli fare un lavoro.

   Di solito quelli bravi veramente scrivono librerie geniali.
   Quelli scarsi ( tipo me) assemblano i pezzi per fare cose.
   Veramente è come costruire qualche cosa col lego, è semplice.

   l’ immagine del buco nero M87 è stata ottenuta da un programmino che usava una serie di librerie piuttosto complesse.

   Chi ha messo insieme le librerie non ha fatto nulla di speciale, ha solo letto i documenti ( forse) di specifica e le ha assemblate.

   Chi ha scritto le librerie ha fatto il vero lavoro

   Ecco una delle librerie fondamentali del lavoro.
   https://github.com/achael/eht-imaging?fbclid=IwAR0DAl_6aKUsXdrYIHzS3vW0KXlGbNN-TjNl9AqQwEUMZ8NGAAx9xmqC_o8

   Rispondi

   1. Quindi confermi che lei c’entra poco? Ti copio-incollo il messaggio trovato su una board americana, giusto per confermare che il ruolo della Bouman è stato tutt’altro che decisivo:

      Turns 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. Either nepotism on the part of the institution OR the media.

      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

      It’s kinda ridiculous, how the media morphs this into something COMPLETELY different.
      btw: that’s also NOT an algo, but just reformatting data.

      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.

      this little part is the share that her contribution does. And again : HOPSTOOLS is just an adaptor for another dataformat that can be read into the ‘mother’ programm. that’s it.

      Andrew Chael wrote 850k out of the 900k lines of code He was also the leader of the project Michael D. Johnson wrote 12k lines of code Chanchikwan wrote 5k lines of code
      The woman? Only wrote 2.4k lines of code
      Interestingly enough, the code she wrote was importing something called HOPStools. Interestingly enough if we go look at HOPStools and all its contributors we get:

      weilgusm wrote 2.9k lines of code
      chanchikwan wrote 676 lines of code
      Andrew Chael wrote 1.2k lines of code
      jpbarrett wrote 71 lines of code
      Katie Bouman wrote 2 lines of code

      Katie Bouman, also isn’t following any one at all on Github and has basically only utilized it for these two projects (Hopstools and EHT)

      The second co-leader of the EHT imaging group is Kazunori Akiyama with the first being, Andrew Chael.
      https://bhi.fas.harvard.edu/people/kazunori-akiyama
      http://news.mit.edu/2019/mit-haystack-first-image-black-hole-0410

      Looks like MIT’s social media twitter account didn’t collaborate with MIT’s own news office since in reality, Katie Bouman did not lead any team at all or was a leader at all.

      The actual leaders were Kazunori Akiyama and Andrew Chael.
      Notice how before this social media shilling on twitter, the MIT article only mentioned Katie Bouman once at the very end of the article.

      http://news.mit.edu/2019/mit-haystack-first-image-black-hole-0410

      The Haystack EHT team includes John Barrett, Roger Cappallo, Joseph Crowley, Mark Derome, Kevin Dudevoir, Michael Hecht, Lynn Matthews, Kotaro Moriyama, Michael Poirier, Alan Rogers, Chester Ruszczyk, Jason SooHoo, Don Sousa, Michael Titus, and Alan Whitney. Additional contributors were MIT alumni Daniel Palumbo, Katie Bouman, Lindy Blackburn, Sera Markoff, and Bill Freeman, a professor in MIT’s Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science.
      How long before this MIT article written by MIT themselves gets taken down and rewritten to give Katie Bouman a whole paragraph to herself?
      When will the mainstream media take responsibility for inaccurate reporting? Why is there such a glaring difference between one of MIT’s twitter accounts versus their own press release?
      Why were the 2 leaders: Kazunori Akiyama and Andrew Chael completely ignored by everybody else?
      4 teams around the world.
      American team was ked by Kazunori Akiyama and Andrew Chael.
      Nowhere it is mentioned that Katie Bouman led the American team, just only these 2 males who were co leaders.
      Where did this Katie Bouman was leader originate from? Even MIT’s own news article doesn’t mention this.

      http://news.mit.edu/2019/mit-haystack-first-image-black-hole-0410

      Katie Bouman did not invent the algorithm.
      Multiple people are cited on the limited proof of concept thesis.
      The actual research and development of practical application of this technology, as well as development of the algorithm itself, was done by a huge team of researchers, not Katie Bouman:

      https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.06226

      https://arxiv.org/pdf/1901.06226.pdf

      https://iopscience.iop.org/journal/2041-8205

      This is the primary research that led to the possibility of imaging the black hole. Notice how the research cites Andrew Chael’s EHT imaging library (the guy who wrote 850,000 lines of code). Chael wrote the entire library. To not give him the same or preferably more credit than Bouman is pretty messed up.

      https://bhi.fas.harvard.edu/people/andrew-chael

      Also, Katie Boumsn did not lead or manage anything. These are the directors, managers, and affiliates:

      https://bhi.fas.harvard.edu/our-people

      Katie Bouman does not deserve 100%, 50%, 25%, 10%, 5%, or even 1% of the credit. There are so many people involved that made far more significant contributions (like Andrew Chael developing the EHT imaging library).
      What has science come to when such incredible falsehoods about who contributed to research are perpetuated by the scientific community and mainstream media? It’s wrong.

      Rispondi

   2. e anche questo meme su Python:

      

      Rispondi

2. Neanche il tempo di fare la battutaccia (“OK, Katie; allora adesso usciresti con me?” – e lei: “sì, ma comunque ti vedo solo come un amico “) ed è partito furioso il white-knighting a favore della signora (sposata) Katie da parte del gay dichiarato (e dal cognome… uh.,. ebraico?) Andrew.

   Rispondi

3. Comunuque Andrew Chael si dichiara gay astronomer in uno dei suoi tweet in difesa della racchietta

   https://www.straitstimes.com/world/united-states/online-trolls-hijacked-a-scientists-image-to-attack-katie-bouman-they-picked-the

   Rispondi

Questo sito usa Akismet per ridurre lo spam. Scopri come i tuoi dati vengono elaborati.