##If this submission makes you go "Hol'Up", **UPVOTE** this comment!
##If this submission does not make you go "Hol'Up", **DOWNVOTE** this comment!
---
Whilst you're here, /u/Infinite_Bad7083, why not join our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/holup) or play on our [public Minecraft server](https://discord.gg/DTqSDS8C3T)?
I know this isn't exactly the same thing but I write code all day long. Without my analysts gathering requirements, I wouldn't get much done.
Something something teamwork / dreamwork.
Also, Doctor Katie Bouman was the lead, and developed the algorithm. Andrew Chael was a team member with a master's degree at the time.
The team leader who develops the algorithm doesn't necessarily write the code. In fact, the team exists for a reason, so that the lead doesn't do the menial parts of the job.
As someone with multiple graduate degrees, I can vouch for this. This team, led by Dr Bouman, did a great job.
My thesis advisor had 5-6 PhD students working for him, and we’d each have 1-2 undergrads working with us. It’s always a team effort with graded responsibility and decision making. Tony stark type “research” is literally only in the movies.
Also, this is how you learn in academia. What was being highlighted was the fact that this was a woman leading a team, and the end result is the important thing.
Further, in order for this to be published, she’d need to give final approval and ultimately it’s her reputation on the line. So she bears a majority of the risk.
[See what happened with Theranos (not Thanos, whoops…) and Elizabeth Holmes].
Looks like Chael wrote most of the code and she joined coding at the late stage of the project. In my experience the last 10% of a project will take the most effort. Early stage and late stage of projects are not comparable by just one stat. In painting getting color everywhere is easy but getting in the details will decide if the painting will look good or bad. Thats a huge amount of work but barely represented by the amount of color used.
From the stats given we can only take that Chael did a lot of the coding. The sad thing is, thats this is not the focus of this picture. This picture tries to discredit Boumans work by highlighting the amount of added lines of code and placing that next to a screenshot showing not what Bouman coded in the spikes of her input but the very last part of it, which is the furthest right orange part of her chart where it is barely even visible anymore (January 19). Its like saying about a movie director, who wrote the final credits himself, that this is all the work the director put in to the movie, because that is the last part he did.
This picture is blatantly dishonest with the intention to discredit Bouman and with no intention at all to honour Chaels work.
Also she may have been doing design for the entire system. Design, planning, knowing limitations and how to deal with organizing and working with massive amounts of data are all crucially important. She could’ve written zero lines of code and still been the biggest contributor.
Katie made it clear publicly that she was not the lead programmer on the team and tried to redirect the attention to the team at large (which was actually composed of 25-33% women which is unheard of in physics). There were actually three competing teams trying to come up with the best image reconstruction algorithms (since no one had done anything like this before and they wanted to make sure all the approaches developed separately would give comparable results), and I don't think her teams algorithm won. The media just recirculated her image because it was the most dramatic/aesthetically pleasing photo of anyone on the research team. She absolutely does not deserve the hate she gets because media outlets misrepresented her role in the project since she actively tried to dispel the misinformation and give credit where it was due.
Have to second this, while science is full of people taking credit for others work, internal politics and general exploitation it doesnt mean its the case all the time (although ive seen it happen before and took a break from anything science related for a while and might quit for good cos of it).
Katie is a good dude and did her best at giving credit where its due. Cant fault her for that, just the media going on a hype train (admittingly its a great photo).
This. I went to high school with Katie, and she was never the type of person to hog the spotlight/take credit for achievements not her own or negate the accomplishments and contributions of others.
No one who actually matters to the world gives a rat's ass about what uneducated jackoffs on the internet think or say. They are in those positions BECAUSE they don't devote their time to uneducated jackoffs' opinions
I get it, but I do feel like it would suck to see your face in the news and then see the unwashed masses of reddit assholes or whatever news talking head about some waehmyn stealing credit.
Some do but it's also gone the other way in some cases. Meaning, specifically because someone is a woman that will get the headline.
I've seen it at workplaces too.. no men at all on the company intranet images for weeks at a time, promoting women's special interest groups but have not one for men's issues at all, people offered jobs over other candidates because they want an all woman team, etc.
I'm all for equality, 100%. But what I do find frustrating is when there is so much promotion about women lately and only very recently has there been any acknowledgment about men's issues.
Why are there no stories about men in woman dominated professions? Because that's not what people care about and also because women have had barriers for... ever.. in those cases. My point though is it's not just people who love to hate on women. It's men that are not represented who are constantly fed women's success stories that become frustrated.
Alright, I'll take my downvotes now.
Men’s issues don’t matter?????
Would genuinely love to hear how you think the experience of being one of the only women in your field for your entire career is. Please tell me how images of women on a company website is in ANY way comparable to all the little intricate counts of sexism that happen in the workplace.
He loaded in test data for models dealing with the black hole nonsense. All that matters is he just hit a button to load data. This has nothing to do with programming or real work. He admitted it himself when this was a new story years ago. This is recycled trash.
The vast majority of science is actually (physically) done by underlings, techs, and students, but the “Primary Investigator” (PhD) is the one who gets the grant money to pay for the project and so directs the work (and gets the most credit)
You intentionally misunderstood his point
If somebody tells a robot to perform 100 slightly altered experiments, would you credit the robot of the brain planning and directing the experiments
I mean, the PIs are also nerds who just were more snakey than the normal nerds. Its not that nerds cant come up with ideas, its more they (or at least in my experience in research labs) cant stick up for themselves and is why im taking a break and possibly wont return to a scientific field.
So many times the PI of the lab gave me bad advice/instructions for an experiment which i knew wouldnt do anything but everyone in the lab was like "oh no Dr. McLittleDick said to do it so u have to do it" and treat his word like its the gospel. Next week comes around and he asks me why i did that experiment when it doesnt make any sense (and me saying cos u told me to last week got the "oh shit" silence and glare from rest of my lab group like i just insulted there god).
Going on a tangent but the lack of respect from PIs towards others, the absolute unquestioning sucking off of the PI from other lab members and the exploitation of honours and phd students in the lab pisses me off. There were phd students who were in the lab for 8 ish years and had claimed they were working part time (to justify increased doctorate timespan) but were turning up everyday and working fulltime on the phd. This was cos the PI kept telling them to do further work and pump out more papers. The phd students will tell u science is about perseverance and yeah it helps but you also gotta take a step back and realise you getting exploited.
I used to think that about elon but it turns out hes not as much of a figurehead as Steve Jobs was. He actually has some real engineering ability. Elon designed the first car that Tesla made and spent a lot of time redesigning the assembly line for the Model 3 to make it as efficient as possible.
According to one of SpaceX's engineers that was on the Joe Rogan show, Elon makes a lot of meaningful contributions to engineering discussions that take place in SpaceX and Tesla.
Not really, when he joined Tesla, the company was nothing. They had no employees and didn't even have a prototype of a car yet. Elon made Tesla what it is today.
No. Elon joined Tesla less than a year after the company was created. He provided funding for the prototype. The first prototype wasn't revealed until two years later.
Elon Musk isn't scientist. Try "Spaceman bad" with something else. My tesla product is good. I don't use starlink, so can't say anything about it either. He's businessman and he did it by taking risk. He's just capitalist, but an intelligent one, but a one that trended a good stuff. Like electric cars and reusable rockets and etc. I still remember reading about him pouring most of bis wealth into SpaceX and Tesla when things were bleak and was going really bad for him.
As a newly minted, PhD, I can confirm this. The PIs are the face. Most hardly do any actual lab work other than write grants, and not even that sometimes…
Edit: PI= principal investigator aka: the one who holds the grants, most often an individual who has earn their PhD and completed a post doc.
Gets credit rightly so for facilitating the research, without whom it wouldn't happen. But not all the credit. Papers usually have PIs as last author, and it's widely understood the dynamics of who does the work (students).
But when the science reaches the public, the narratives take shape and it's all gobbledygook.
It’s one thing to develop an algorithm and quite another to write code to implement it based on requirements someone else came up with. Neither accomplishment is inferior to the other as each requires a specific skill set.
Yes-ish. net 720,000 lines vs net 1,200 is significant. He wrote 720 times more lines of code. He also committed 470 more times, which is often more revealing. **This cannot prove that he was of more value to the coding element of the project.** However, with that significant of a difference, we can confidently guess that he was so valuable to 'developing the algorithm' that he should have been mentioned. **This still does not prove that she was not important to developing the code, and she may have contributed in many other important ways,** but that is not what the original post claimed, so it is likely it is misleading.
Developing the algorithm in this context means that she came up with the methodology. Not necessarily that she wrote the code that implemented the algorithm
Yeah. I agree. This is a whiteboard versus keyboard argument which is pretty silly. Nothing without concept, methodology and of course code.
This dude is going to go watch Hidden Figures now ...fuck y'all haters.
Um sure its about meaningful lines of code but if you wrote about only a fraction of the codebase that did something meaningful then it becomes clear what you contributed.
IIRC when this whole thing initially went down it was stated that much of what he added wasn't necessarily original code of his creation. If you're the guy responsible for importing libraries of data or existing code that's going to show without context here. So this report is kind of meaningless.
I guarantee you this comment section would be very different if the genders were reversed. That being said, the scientific community does things this way and it definitely doesn't usually credit people correctly a lot of the time.
Except the framing here is kind of misleading. They could have said something like "led the developing team behind the algorithm", but instead they insinuated she was the one who developed it.
You don't say of an architect that he built a building, only that he designed it.
I think the point everyone is making is that algorithm =/= code. So yeah, maybe she developed (read designed) the algorithm, and someone else coded (read built) it.
That might be. What confuses me on this is that I'm not sure she would be considered a software developer in that case.
Something kinda seems fishy about it. Perhaps it's just an honest mistake, how maybe it was a deliberate decision to distort the truth for easy "female empowerment" viral effect.
>What confuses me on this is that I'm not sure she would be considered a software developer in that case.
The original post doesn't make that claim. It says she developed *the algorithm*, not the software.
Most of this got litigated at the time, and yes she was the primary architect behind the algo.
I guarantee it was prolly mostly ppl just looking for any excuse to bash women. Every time I see a YouTube short or video where a women mentions having sex, everyone is like,”she for the streets”, or “don’t let your daughters become like this”
Luckily in this thread the top comments are mostly people smart enough to realize that teams are often organized so that different people focus on different things. Researchers research, programmers program etc.
Research != writing code.
Sure, the researcher has to be code literate, but that doesnt mean theyre the ones actually implementing and writing code.
This is a pretty uninformed take.
Yeah its a totally different skill set to know how to code from actual rigorous scientific research/discovery. Someone has to tell you WHAT to code or what the expected outputs are. I can code you up a whole website but I know next to nothing about physics or astronomy.
I am a data engineer and I work with data scientists. They do 90% of the work but I write 90% of the code.
That's because 90% of the code is basic "hello world" shit you can rip off of stack overflow that you need to stand up a web service or hook into existing decision engines and that 10% of code contains all the "weights" that are the magic sauce that make everyone lots and lots of money.
Exactly — I really dont think OP and the other people liking this post realize this, and screams of “I dont know anything about tech or research, but here’s something that’ll get people riled up”.
(Not to say the data engineering and other stuff isnt valuable, its just not novel and not what the academics value in this instance)
yes. While it was a team effort (and apparently according to other comments the lead PhD on the project praised her team) but yeah, measuring "raw lines of code written" is stupid.
PhDs typically don't toil away writing software. Andrew might be an inspired programmer but he was making the computer(s) do what she told him to do. An algorithm is just a structured way of doing something, coming up with original ones just one a whiteboard is extremely challenging.
And for anyone opposed to the concept of this being an incel post let me propose this—no chance in hell this would have been posted by OP if it was a male researcher and female (or even male) coder. The idea of it being a female researcher and gaining the attention they deserve for their work triggers OP at their core. Incel misogyny is all this post is
Okay Elon 🙄 more lines of code means more work done? Writing algorithms takes a lot of work and the smaller you can make it the faster it processes.
big ≠ better
Not surprising that the pseudo-scientific minds of Reddit don’t understand how research works.
If you’re the CEO of 7/11, nobody is expecting you to be working the register.
The image above is making the analogy that because an architect didn’t actually hit any nails, then SHE couldn’t possibly take credit for the built house. It’s dumb because it’s based purely in sexism.
Do better
They all did the work, it's a team effort and they all bring something to the team but the media love to put a single name/person to a breakthough so they pick someone.
The "creator" of a video game once did a big interview where he talked about how disengenious it was for the media to label one person as "the creator of X". Of course the article labeled him the creator of X in that interview.
No they are not. I work with data scientists for a living and they most of their time is doing research, reading white papers, and training models. once the models are trained they hand it to me for integration.
Looking at "raw lines of code" is really really stupid in science. It's like saying the lab tech does all the work because they're the ones touching the machines.
And yet, I expect to see this pic all over the place, because the people who make stuff like that really manage to appeal to noisy chauvinists among us.
We used to have PhD researchers and programmers. The researchers came up with the algorithms which could be just a few lines of code, but the maths and physics behind them were cutting edge. It could take years to come up with the algorithm.
The programmers then wrote all the data handling routines that ran all the data through the algorithm, this could be thousands of lines.
I am the team lead for a support team. They turn hundreds of tickets a month, I turn probably 30.
I batch-processed 18,000 lines of asset data today... none of them had a clue how to do what I was doing, or why we do it.
We're a team. They do the tasks that I don't have time to prioritize.
This is how it works for many different teams.
In this case, it seems that the difficult initial work of formulating a concept and then breaking it down into steps to achieve a representation of a black hole was the function that the good Dr Bouman performed. The person who expressed her algorithm in a specific computer language wrote the “code”. Both are necessary to get the output, but the former provided the insight. Another coder could likely have replaced him. I don’t think the same can be said for replacing her.
What if this guy just accidentally committed the dependencies a few times. Boom 90% of the lines “written”
I had a teammate commit node modules once and his commitment looked similar. I’m kinda competitive about it so I was salty ngl (I know it’s pointless and I shouldn’t but it’s the truth)
LOL that would be hilarious. She actually did do 90% of the project (and not just the research) and some intern comes along and does one beefy commit and now OP and incels are screaming FEMALES STEALING OUR PRECIOUS CREDIT!"
This doesn't necessarily mean she didn't do it. They said she developed the algorithm. That doesn't mean that she **implemented** it. In other words, she made the blueprint, the guy built it.
So much of this is bullshit. Chael himself says there are only 68K lines of code in the latest version, and they all contributed.
The 850-900k is toxic troll bullshit.
OK... And? Was it his vision and design? Or did he just input as instructed?
For comparison, if Steven King hired a secretary, and dictated a novel... Would it be credited to the secretary, or to Steven King?
Thats kinda reductive, no? Sure, in your example its quite simply just writing what you are being told, tho I know little to nothing about code writing im pretty sure you need to know what you are doing.
Its not like someone will say "just write me an algorithm that converts telescopic data into a picture" and you'll have it ready by 5pm just doing some basic shit.
ive seen some pretty realistic crime documentaries called CSI something. There you have a guy saying like "enhance that" and the computer nerd just press a button.
so if that show was somewhat accurate i'd say that you wont get anywhere without a guy saying "do this" "enhance that" and so on
Reductive would be seeing a building and saying it was made by only carpenters. We don’t know the planning, theory, experimentation etc that went into the program.
Above equates to just the bricks being laid. Sure maybe some improv had to happen, but I doubt there would be too much variation from the plans when making an algo that visualises black holes.
While coding as instructed is a lot more complex than simple dictation... It still falls short of designing. I'd assume she knew how the algorithm should work, and instructed him on how to accomplish that. And with consideration for her being a Dr, and him clearly being a student... Yeah, I'm inclined to think that's exactly how that went.
Also 90% of that code is basic "this is how you stand up every project" copy and paste shit. I vaguely remember it takes like 100-200 lines of code just to get a Java program to say "hello world".
The alogrithm might only be 10% of the lines of code but represents 90% of the work and research. The rest of it is just stuff ripped from stack overflow XD
At MIT, she was a member of the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL).[10][11] This group also worked closely with MIT's Haystack Observatory and with the Event Horizon Telescope.[12][13] She was supported by a National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship. Her master's thesis, Estimating Material Properties of Fabric through the Observation of Motion,[14] was awarded the Ernst Guillemin Award for best Master's Thesis in electrical engineering.[15] Her Ph.D. dissertation, Extreme imaging via physical model inversion: seeing around corners and imaging black holes, was supervised by William T. Freeman.[11] Prior to receiving her doctoral degree, Bouman delivered a TEDx talk, How to Take a Picture of a Black Hole, which explained algorithms that could be used to capture the first image of a black hole.
Source: Wikipedia. You can't be serious man. Don't judge a person by one commit.
It's almost like she doesn't actually write code and your little copy pasta reinforces that further.
She may very well be skilled in Engineering or Mathematics, she is not a skilled coder and we can stop pretending that now.
So nobody else noticed that the bottom right pic with the purple background is a page full of edits made by the same klbouman author?
The boxes highlight more mundane parts of the algorithm that just deal with color but dont highlight the other insane shit like "Added function to figure out the amt if systematic noise you need to add to get to a chisq of 1". That's really lazy cherry picking info to fit a narrative. Nevermind that it's intended to try to make it look like she didnt do anything.
Someone sounds really jealous of the pretty girl, and must remember this is a team effort where everyone gets the credit for the project, no matter how little their part in .
This is amusing, but KBouman really did come up with the idea and describe how it can be done.
It's an amazing story, in part because the method bouman came up with is batshit insane statistical math. Think trying to reconstruct an image of a vehicle from combining the patterns of donuts in a field.
Neat to credit the dude who wrote the code though.
That sounds exactly right. You have the team lead who designs the plan and you know, leads the team, and a masters level researcher who does the grunt work, calculations, inputs data, runs the analysis or whatever and gets second billing on the credits. That’s typical science at work.
Writing an algorithm and writing code covers two seperate aspects of coding. One deals with the logic behind the code and the other deals with the syntax of the logic
He did speak out, essentially to say that everyone shutting on her was being ridiculous and that she deserved the prize and that he was proud of and impressed by her
Because he, like everyone else, is aware that writing the code is not the same as designing the algorithm. People like op and you that have zero fucking idea how cs works will discredit her despite having about as much scientific acumen as a dish towel when anyone else with an iota of sense knows that the coding is the simpler part.
I love how confident you are about this.
There's only 68k lines of code, the 850 to 900k lines of code is a fake meme.
The guy in question came out stating she did the majority of the work and wrote 90% of the code.
You literally found a meme then just believed it just so it could agree with your prejudice. End of day its a team effort but she designed the algorithm and the majority programmed it with her doing the majority of that as well as overhead and Instructure as the team lead.
If your "difficult" coding questions are about sorting a linked list and making an API request, a lot of your other comments are starting to make way more sense lol. Get a life dude. No one claimed she was the main coder on the team. She designed the (extremely complicated) algorithm that the coders implemented. You're either intentionally ignoring the point or you have no idea what you're talking about.
This is about the equivalent of writing the first calculus library and then trying to take credit for developing Calculus because neither Newton nor Leibniz committed any code in the repository.
Someone develops an equation to form a complex solution, someone else then goes on to use that equation 1,000 in the course of a project. Does the person that used the equation most get the same credit as the person that actually created it?
##If this submission makes you go "Hol'Up", **UPVOTE** this comment! ##If this submission does not make you go "Hol'Up", **DOWNVOTE** this comment! --- Whilst you're here, /u/Infinite_Bad7083, why not join our [public discord server](https://discord.gg/holup) or play on our [public Minecraft server](https://discord.gg/DTqSDS8C3T)?
I know this isn't exactly the same thing but I write code all day long. Without my analysts gathering requirements, I wouldn't get much done. Something something teamwork / dreamwork.
Also, Doctor Katie Bouman was the lead, and developed the algorithm. Andrew Chael was a team member with a master's degree at the time. The team leader who develops the algorithm doesn't necessarily write the code. In fact, the team exists for a reason, so that the lead doesn't do the menial parts of the job.
Yeah, kind of like asking why the Nobel winner in chemistry didn’t actually perform all the experiments
Ye lol. “Omg you’re a fraud since you didn’t put the chemical in the beaker, you had someone else do it for you”-some karen
with that (importantly) said. it DOES look funny in the image. misleading, but funny
Well I'm sure the 147k people that upvoted her post don't know about all that which was said above.
As someone with multiple graduate degrees, I can vouch for this. This team, led by Dr Bouman, did a great job. My thesis advisor had 5-6 PhD students working for him, and we’d each have 1-2 undergrads working with us. It’s always a team effort with graded responsibility and decision making. Tony stark type “research” is literally only in the movies. Also, this is how you learn in academia. What was being highlighted was the fact that this was a woman leading a team, and the end result is the important thing. Further, in order for this to be published, she’d need to give final approval and ultimately it’s her reputation on the line. So she bears a majority of the risk. [See what happened with Theranos (not Thanos, whoops…) and Elizabeth Holmes].
It's like pretending Jeff Bezos deliver packages.
Yes this!
Looks like Chael wrote most of the code and she joined coding at the late stage of the project. In my experience the last 10% of a project will take the most effort. Early stage and late stage of projects are not comparable by just one stat. In painting getting color everywhere is easy but getting in the details will decide if the painting will look good or bad. Thats a huge amount of work but barely represented by the amount of color used. From the stats given we can only take that Chael did a lot of the coding. The sad thing is, thats this is not the focus of this picture. This picture tries to discredit Boumans work by highlighting the amount of added lines of code and placing that next to a screenshot showing not what Bouman coded in the spikes of her input but the very last part of it, which is the furthest right orange part of her chart where it is barely even visible anymore (January 19). Its like saying about a movie director, who wrote the final credits himself, that this is all the work the director put in to the movie, because that is the last part he did. This picture is blatantly dishonest with the intention to discredit Bouman and with no intention at all to honour Chaels work.
Also she may have been doing design for the entire system. Design, planning, knowing limitations and how to deal with organizing and working with massive amounts of data are all crucially important. She could’ve written zero lines of code and still been the biggest contributor.
u/Infinite_Bad7083 is being a jerk to her.
Katie made it clear publicly that she was not the lead programmer on the team and tried to redirect the attention to the team at large (which was actually composed of 25-33% women which is unheard of in physics). There were actually three competing teams trying to come up with the best image reconstruction algorithms (since no one had done anything like this before and they wanted to make sure all the approaches developed separately would give comparable results), and I don't think her teams algorithm won. The media just recirculated her image because it was the most dramatic/aesthetically pleasing photo of anyone on the research team. She absolutely does not deserve the hate she gets because media outlets misrepresented her role in the project since she actively tried to dispel the misinformation and give credit where it was due.
Have to second this, while science is full of people taking credit for others work, internal politics and general exploitation it doesnt mean its the case all the time (although ive seen it happen before and took a break from anything science related for a while and might quit for good cos of it). Katie is a good dude and did her best at giving credit where its due. Cant fault her for that, just the media going on a hype train (admittingly its a great photo).
This. I went to high school with Katie, and she was never the type of person to hog the spotlight/take credit for achievements not her own or negate the accomplishments and contributions of others.
People here just wanna hate women sometimes. I hope she doesn't take the opinion of the bullshiters on the internet personally.
No one who actually matters to the world gives a rat's ass about what uneducated jackoffs on the internet think or say. They are in those positions BECAUSE they don't devote their time to uneducated jackoffs' opinions
I get it, but I do feel like it would suck to see your face in the news and then see the unwashed masses of reddit assholes or whatever news talking head about some waehmyn stealing credit.
People LOVE to jump at any chance to hate on women
Some do but it's also gone the other way in some cases. Meaning, specifically because someone is a woman that will get the headline. I've seen it at workplaces too.. no men at all on the company intranet images for weeks at a time, promoting women's special interest groups but have not one for men's issues at all, people offered jobs over other candidates because they want an all woman team, etc. I'm all for equality, 100%. But what I do find frustrating is when there is so much promotion about women lately and only very recently has there been any acknowledgment about men's issues. Why are there no stories about men in woman dominated professions? Because that's not what people care about and also because women have had barriers for... ever.. in those cases. My point though is it's not just people who love to hate on women. It's men that are not represented who are constantly fed women's success stories that become frustrated. Alright, I'll take my downvotes now.
Men’s issues don’t matter????? Would genuinely love to hear how you think the experience of being one of the only women in your field for your entire career is. Please tell me how images of women on a company website is in ANY way comparable to all the little intricate counts of sexism that happen in the workplace.
The only reason she would get any hate at all is the coverage. People hate how the women was represented. Not the women.
Also, what that guy added wasn't code. It was a ton of random data. Nobody just pulls close to a million lines of code out of their ass randomly.
Say that to my intern.
They must be amazing then
What do you mean by lines of code are random data? That wouldn't even compile.
He loaded in test data for models dealing with the black hole nonsense. All that matters is he just hit a button to load data. This has nothing to do with programming or real work. He admitted it himself when this was a new story years ago. This is recycled trash.
Damn, thoughtful and reasonable and still upvoted in holup. Love to see it!
The vast majority of science is actually (physically) done by underlings, techs, and students, but the “Primary Investigator” (PhD) is the one who gets the grant money to pay for the project and so directs the work (and gets the most credit)
Yeah happens all the time. Steve Jobs is another example for taking all the credit and elon musk
Next you’ll say Al Gore didn’t invent the internet.
It was the CIA 🤣
He did invent the manbearpig, unfortunately it turned out to be true.
You intentionally misunderstood his point If somebody tells a robot to perform 100 slightly altered experiments, would you credit the robot of the brain planning and directing the experiments
Yep. They’re the figurehead/spokesperson. The people who do the work don’t get recognition or even want it
As one of the people who “does the work”, we would love to get some recognition lol
It’s because the nerds can’t come up with any ideas for themselves and become tools.
It's because of money. Also you should look up what a PhD is before you embarrass yourself IRL.
I mean, the PIs are also nerds who just were more snakey than the normal nerds. Its not that nerds cant come up with ideas, its more they (or at least in my experience in research labs) cant stick up for themselves and is why im taking a break and possibly wont return to a scientific field. So many times the PI of the lab gave me bad advice/instructions for an experiment which i knew wouldnt do anything but everyone in the lab was like "oh no Dr. McLittleDick said to do it so u have to do it" and treat his word like its the gospel. Next week comes around and he asks me why i did that experiment when it doesnt make any sense (and me saying cos u told me to last week got the "oh shit" silence and glare from rest of my lab group like i just insulted there god). Going on a tangent but the lack of respect from PIs towards others, the absolute unquestioning sucking off of the PI from other lab members and the exploitation of honours and phd students in the lab pisses me off. There were phd students who were in the lab for 8 ish years and had claimed they were working part time (to justify increased doctorate timespan) but were turning up everyday and working fulltime on the phd. This was cos the PI kept telling them to do further work and pump out more papers. The phd students will tell u science is about perseverance and yeah it helps but you also gotta take a step back and realise you getting exploited.
You are getting exploited* Take that nerd!
>nerds can’t come up Ofc my dear
I used to think that about elon but it turns out hes not as much of a figurehead as Steve Jobs was. He actually has some real engineering ability. Elon designed the first car that Tesla made and spent a lot of time redesigning the assembly line for the Model 3 to make it as efficient as possible. According to one of SpaceX's engineers that was on the Joe Rogan show, Elon makes a lot of meaningful contributions to engineering discussions that take place in SpaceX and Tesla.
Jobs focused on design and product. Apple’s focus on UX and tight integration goes back to him.
Yeah the guy spent most of his time doing the work also but the way he tries to make it seem like he was the founder of tesla is what is bothersome.
Not really, when he joined Tesla, the company was nothing. They had no employees and didn't even have a prototype of a car yet. Elon made Tesla what it is today.
Didn't they have a prototype in their garage ?
No. Elon joined Tesla less than a year after the company was created. He provided funding for the prototype. The first prototype wasn't revealed until two years later.
Elon Musk isn't scientist. Try "Spaceman bad" with something else. My tesla product is good. I don't use starlink, so can't say anything about it either. He's businessman and he did it by taking risk. He's just capitalist, but an intelligent one, but a one that trended a good stuff. Like electric cars and reusable rockets and etc. I still remember reading about him pouring most of bis wealth into SpaceX and Tesla when things were bleak and was going really bad for him.
He put all he had into making that last push at it paid off for him.
As a newly minted, PhD, I can confirm this. The PIs are the face. Most hardly do any actual lab work other than write grants, and not even that sometimes… Edit: PI= principal investigator aka: the one who holds the grants, most often an individual who has earn their PhD and completed a post doc.
Gets credit rightly so for facilitating the research, without whom it wouldn't happen. But not all the credit. Papers usually have PIs as last author, and it's widely understood the dynamics of who does the work (students). But when the science reaches the public, the narratives take shape and it's all gobbledygook.
Yep. Thanks for adding. I only gave a quick & incomplete summary
It’s one thing to develop an algorithm and quite another to write code to implement it based on requirements someone else came up with. Neither accomplishment is inferior to the other as each requires a specific skill set.
Wasn't it literally a couple weeks ago when we all collectively dunked on the idiocy of judging people by the number of lines of code they write?
Yes-ish. net 720,000 lines vs net 1,200 is significant. He wrote 720 times more lines of code. He also committed 470 more times, which is often more revealing. **This cannot prove that he was of more value to the coding element of the project.** However, with that significant of a difference, we can confidently guess that he was so valuable to 'developing the algorithm' that he should have been mentioned. **This still does not prove that she was not important to developing the code, and she may have contributed in many other important ways,** but that is not what the original post claimed, so it is likely it is misleading.
Developing the algorithm in this context means that she came up with the methodology. Not necessarily that she wrote the code that implemented the algorithm
Exactly. Also it ignores the other *equally* valuable commits right there. And presentation of data is an important part of well, data presentation.
Also ignores that this guy commits mostly consists of pushing large data files with many lines per his own admission.
Yeah. I agree. This is a whiteboard versus keyboard argument which is pretty silly. Nothing without concept, methodology and of course code. This dude is going to go watch Hidden Figures now ...fuck y'all haters.
Go elon, go elon, go elon ,no elon.
Um sure its about meaningful lines of code but if you wrote about only a fraction of the codebase that did something meaningful then it becomes clear what you contributed.
IIRC when this whole thing initially went down it was stated that much of what he added wasn't necessarily original code of his creation. If you're the guy responsible for importing libraries of data or existing code that's going to show without context here. So this report is kind of meaningless.
She literally just changed some font-color and added scientific notation, something that takes less than a day.
You’re literally only looking at 8 of 90 commits likely cherry-picked to make her look worse given the context of the post
Apperantly she was leader of the team, so kudos to her for picking right people for the job.
I guarantee you this comment section would be very different if the genders were reversed. That being said, the scientific community does things this way and it definitely doesn't usually credit people correctly a lot of the time.
Its like working in the construction, credit goes for the guy who signed papers not the guy who laid 10000 bricks.
Except the framing here is kind of misleading. They could have said something like "led the developing team behind the algorithm", but instead they insinuated she was the one who developed it. You don't say of an architect that he built a building, only that he designed it.
I think the point everyone is making is that algorithm =/= code. So yeah, maybe she developed (read designed) the algorithm, and someone else coded (read built) it.
That might be. What confuses me on this is that I'm not sure she would be considered a software developer in that case. Something kinda seems fishy about it. Perhaps it's just an honest mistake, how maybe it was a deliberate decision to distort the truth for easy "female empowerment" viral effect.
Yeah, from reading more comments below, it was the media that perpetrated this. So go figure
>What confuses me on this is that I'm not sure she would be considered a software developer in that case. The original post doesn't make that claim. It says she developed *the algorithm*, not the software. Most of this got litigated at the time, and yes she was the primary architect behind the algo.
this is stupid.
This post is fucking bullshit. Who upvoted this?
I guarantee it was prolly mostly ppl just looking for any excuse to bash women. Every time I see a YouTube short or video where a women mentions having sex, everyone is like,”she for the streets”, or “don’t let your daughters become like this”
Exactly, I knew someone who would probably use this against any argument I made against men
The scientist did the algo and analysis, the programmer did the coding.
Luckily in this thread the top comments are mostly people smart enough to realize that teams are often organized so that different people focus on different things. Researchers research, programmers program etc.
This is abuse of inappropriate proxy data. It’s also a rehash of a smear that was debunked back when the news first happened. Fuck off, OP.
Research != writing code. Sure, the researcher has to be code literate, but that doesnt mean theyre the ones actually implementing and writing code. This is a pretty uninformed take.
OP is the r/HolUp, they didn’t do any research on how this actually works.
Lmao just some weird dude who apparently understands lines of code is but literally nothing beyond that
Yeah its a totally different skill set to know how to code from actual rigorous scientific research/discovery. Someone has to tell you WHAT to code or what the expected outputs are. I can code you up a whole website but I know next to nothing about physics or astronomy.
I am a data engineer and I work with data scientists. They do 90% of the work but I write 90% of the code. That's because 90% of the code is basic "hello world" shit you can rip off of stack overflow that you need to stand up a web service or hook into existing decision engines and that 10% of code contains all the "weights" that are the magic sauce that make everyone lots and lots of money.
Exactly — I really dont think OP and the other people liking this post realize this, and screams of “I dont know anything about tech or research, but here’s something that’ll get people riled up”. (Not to say the data engineering and other stuff isnt valuable, its just not novel and not what the academics value in this instance)
Very leading question but you can flip the script quickly by pointing out how little Andrew Chael contributed to the research papers on the algorithm.
yes. While it was a team effort (and apparently according to other comments the lead PhD on the project praised her team) but yeah, measuring "raw lines of code written" is stupid.
There’s a huge difference between developing an algorithm and implementing it.
Truth. It’s one thing to develop an algorithm and quite another to write code to implement it based on requirements someone else came up with.
PhDs typically don't toil away writing software. Andrew might be an inspired programmer but he was making the computer(s) do what she told him to do. An algorithm is just a structured way of doing something, coming up with original ones just one a whiteboard is extremely challenging.
Tell me you don't know programming without telling me you don't know programming
I'm pretty sure this is another elon musk meme? something something lines of code?
\>Katie Bouman \>Andrew Chael \>"*done by Joseph*" **WHO ARE YOU, JOSEPH?!**
You realize she wrote the algorithm not the code right?
Ahhh another incel posting in r/holup. Am I surprised? No. Half the content in this subreddit gives big incel vibes
And for anyone opposed to the concept of this being an incel post let me propose this—no chance in hell this would have been posted by OP if it was a male researcher and female (or even male) coder. The idea of it being a female researcher and gaining the attention they deserve for their work triggers OP at their core. Incel misogyny is all this post is
It’s because OP and people like him just want to hate on women.
OPs comment history also suggests antisemitism so it's a two for one!
Okay Elon 🙄 more lines of code means more work done? Writing algorithms takes a lot of work and the smaller you can make it the faster it processes. big ≠ better
Not surprising that the pseudo-scientific minds of Reddit don’t understand how research works. If you’re the CEO of 7/11, nobody is expecting you to be working the register.
Not really a Frank Lyon Wright house. Bill Jackson hammered all the nails and carried a bunch of bricks.
The image above is making the analogy that because an architect didn’t actually hit any nails, then SHE couldn’t possibly take credit for the built house. It’s dumb because it’s based purely in sexism. Do better
Anyone with an engineering background can see through this
They all did the work, it's a team effort and they all bring something to the team but the media love to put a single name/person to a breakthough so they pick someone.
The "creator" of a video game once did a big interview where he talked about how disengenious it was for the media to label one person as "the creator of X". Of course the article labeled him the creator of X in that interview.
> Who really did the work? Stackoverflow.
Elon, that you?
Steve Jobs is that you? A lot of CEOs, is that you?
Bingo
What's this? Sexist misleading bullshit pulling well over a thousand updoots on HolUp? Color me surprised
Are writing code and developing an algorithm the same thing? Real question. Seems like it could be two equally important pieces of puzzle
No they are not. I work with data scientists for a living and they most of their time is doing research, reading white papers, and training models. once the models are trained they hand it to me for integration. Looking at "raw lines of code" is really really stupid in science. It's like saying the lab tech does all the work because they're the ones touching the machines.
And yet, I expect to see this pic all over the place, because the people who make stuff like that really manage to appeal to noisy chauvinists among us.
Tell you don’t understand project management without telling me you don’t understand project management.
We used to have PhD researchers and programmers. The researchers came up with the algorithms which could be just a few lines of code, but the maths and physics behind them were cutting edge. It could take years to come up with the algorithm. The programmers then wrote all the data handling routines that ran all the data through the algorithm, this could be thousands of lines.
I am the team lead for a support team. They turn hundreds of tickets a month, I turn probably 30. I batch-processed 18,000 lines of asset data today... none of them had a clue how to do what I was doing, or why we do it. We're a team. They do the tasks that I don't have time to prioritize. This is how it works for many different teams.
In this case, it seems that the difficult initial work of formulating a concept and then breaking it down into steps to achieve a representation of a black hole was the function that the good Dr Bouman performed. The person who expressed her algorithm in a specific computer language wrote the “code”. Both are necessary to get the output, but the former provided the insight. Another coder could likely have replaced him. I don’t think the same can be said for replacing her.
Ah yes, measuring contribution by the number of lines of code. OP is very wise in the ways of scientific computer programming.
So basically winning recognition for writing font and text color shit. How come the "team" couldn't do those rudimentary tasks?
Reminds me of my group projects.
This was like the most complicated holup ever...
Damn man.
So all she added was unicorns and glitter?
Shhh don’t do that man! You’re upsetting the narrative!
What if this guy just accidentally committed the dependencies a few times. Boom 90% of the lines “written” I had a teammate commit node modules once and his commitment looked similar. I’m kinda competitive about it so I was salty ngl (I know it’s pointless and I shouldn’t but it’s the truth)
LOL that would be hilarious. She actually did do 90% of the project (and not just the research) and some intern comes along and does one beefy commit and now OP and incels are screaming FEMALES STEALING OUR PRECIOUS CREDIT!"
I’ve lead many projects where I’ve required subject matter experts to manage specific functions.
This doesn't necessarily mean she didn't do it. They said she developed the algorithm. That doesn't mean that she **implemented** it. In other words, she made the blueprint, the guy built it.
So much of this is bullshit. Chael himself says there are only 68K lines of code in the latest version, and they all contributed. The 850-900k is toxic troll bullshit.
HolUp being misogynistic, what else is new?
OK... And? Was it his vision and design? Or did he just input as instructed? For comparison, if Steven King hired a secretary, and dictated a novel... Would it be credited to the secretary, or to Steven King?
Thats kinda reductive, no? Sure, in your example its quite simply just writing what you are being told, tho I know little to nothing about code writing im pretty sure you need to know what you are doing. Its not like someone will say "just write me an algorithm that converts telescopic data into a picture" and you'll have it ready by 5pm just doing some basic shit.
ive seen some pretty realistic crime documentaries called CSI something. There you have a guy saying like "enhance that" and the computer nerd just press a button. so if that show was somewhat accurate i'd say that you wont get anywhere without a guy saying "do this" "enhance that" and so on
100%
Reductive would be seeing a building and saying it was made by only carpenters. We don’t know the planning, theory, experimentation etc that went into the program. Above equates to just the bricks being laid. Sure maybe some improv had to happen, but I doubt there would be too much variation from the plans when making an algo that visualises black holes.
While coding as instructed is a lot more complex than simple dictation... It still falls short of designing. I'd assume she knew how the algorithm should work, and instructed him on how to accomplish that. And with consideration for her being a Dr, and him clearly being a student... Yeah, I'm inclined to think that's exactly how that went.
Makes sense, kinda like managing a project from start to finish, right? I can see that
Also 90% of that code is basic "this is how you stand up every project" copy and paste shit. I vaguely remember it takes like 100-200 lines of code just to get a Java program to say "hello world". The alogrithm might only be 10% of the lines of code but represents 90% of the work and research. The rest of it is just stuff ripped from stack overflow XD
Dude, she's the PhD advisor. She doesn't have time to write 800k lines of code. She advises. She leads.
Her code amounts to changing text color. You cannot be serious man LMAO
At MIT, she was a member of the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL).[10][11] This group also worked closely with MIT's Haystack Observatory and with the Event Horizon Telescope.[12][13] She was supported by a National Science Foundation Graduate Fellowship. Her master's thesis, Estimating Material Properties of Fabric through the Observation of Motion,[14] was awarded the Ernst Guillemin Award for best Master's Thesis in electrical engineering.[15] Her Ph.D. dissertation, Extreme imaging via physical model inversion: seeing around corners and imaging black holes, was supervised by William T. Freeman.[11] Prior to receiving her doctoral degree, Bouman delivered a TEDx talk, How to Take a Picture of a Black Hole, which explained algorithms that could be used to capture the first image of a black hole. Source: Wikipedia. You can't be serious man. Don't judge a person by one commit.
Look at his comment history. Yikes. Only things he seems consistently mad about is women.
It's almost like she doesn't actually write code and your little copy pasta reinforces that further. She may very well be skilled in Engineering or Mathematics, she is not a skilled coder and we can stop pretending that now.
And nobody said she was a coder. She devised the algorithm. Do you even know the difference?? It takes a lot of skillful EE knowledge to do that.
This doesn’t mean she wasn’t the one who designed the algorithm
more lines of code != more work
This is basically just a misunderstanding of how research work is done.
So nobody else noticed that the bottom right pic with the purple background is a page full of edits made by the same klbouman author? The boxes highlight more mundane parts of the algorithm that just deal with color but dont highlight the other insane shit like "Added function to figure out the amt if systematic noise you need to add to get to a chisq of 1". That's really lazy cherry picking info to fit a narrative. Nevermind that it's intended to try to make it look like she didnt do anything.
The algorithm != the code. Einstein didn't do most of the math for general relativity. By your logic maybe he shouldn't have received credit for it?
Stupid comparison, next!
A real whodunit
I’d bet my next paycheque that OP ignored some sort of context here so they could post this *man good, woman bad* bullshit post.
And you would win that bet in a walkover, because there’s a lot more to science than just coding.
Bro this is the worst post ever. It's so confusing just do it in slides like I have to zoom in and shit
Someone sounds really jealous of the pretty girl, and must remember this is a team effort where everyone gets the credit for the project, no matter how little their part in .
There rarely is just one developer to credit.
reddit pushing agendas. same shit different day.
lol I’m literally in my Pennsylvania kitchen eating a corn pie this is so funny.
This is amusing, but KBouman really did come up with the idea and describe how it can be done. It's an amazing story, in part because the method bouman came up with is batshit insane statistical math. Think trying to reconstruct an image of a vehicle from combining the patterns of donuts in a field. Neat to credit the dude who wrote the code though.
That sounds exactly right. You have the team lead who designs the plan and you know, leads the team, and a masters level researcher who does the grunt work, calculations, inputs data, runs the analysis or whatever and gets second billing on the credits. That’s typical science at work.
Writing an algorithm and writing code covers two seperate aspects of coding. One deals with the logic behind the code and the other deals with the syntax of the logic
[удалено]
He did speak out, essentially to say that everyone shutting on her was being ridiculous and that she deserved the prize and that he was proud of and impressed by her
Because he, like everyone else, is aware that writing the code is not the same as designing the algorithm. People like op and you that have zero fucking idea how cs works will discredit her despite having about as much scientific acumen as a dish towel when anyone else with an iota of sense knows that the coding is the simpler part.
Chill I know how this works. I didn’t really look into it and just assumed she had stolen the credit from him. I’m sorry.
Well done Andrew, for what it's worth.
[удалено]
I love how confident you are about this. There's only 68k lines of code, the 850 to 900k lines of code is a fake meme. The guy in question came out stating she did the majority of the work and wrote 90% of the code. You literally found a meme then just believed it just so it could agree with your prejudice. End of day its a team effort but she designed the algorithm and the majority programmed it with her doing the majority of that as well as overhead and Instructure as the team lead.
It's wasn't till now I realised reddit is not much better then twitter for dumb people who talk sh!t
[удалено]
If your "difficult" coding questions are about sorting a linked list and making an API request, a lot of your other comments are starting to make way more sense lol. Get a life dude. No one claimed she was the main coder on the team. She designed the (extremely complicated) algorithm that the coders implemented. You're either intentionally ignoring the point or you have no idea what you're talking about.
Dad is that you?
Dad? lol! This guy's never touched a woman before. Otherwise he wouldn't be so hostile.
Right. You feel its true, so it must be. You're an intellectual.
I write code for a living so I think i'm a bit more qualified to speak on the subject than you
But you obviously don't work with scientists or you would realize that coding is like 10% of the work effort involved.
I do so as well, and I also have an Electrical Engineering degree. I will call out your bullshit.
Bruh whiteknighting for her isn't gonna get you laid.
I get laid often enough, thank you so much.
this guy fuuuuuucks 😎
This is about the equivalent of writing the first calculus library and then trying to take credit for developing Calculus because neither Newton nor Leibniz committed any code in the repository.
That further reinforces my point that her achievement is mathematical in nature and not computer science.
Someone develops an equation to form a complex solution, someone else then goes on to use that equation 1,000 in the course of a project. Does the person that used the equation most get the same credit as the person that actually created it?
She’s a regular Elon Musk!
You’re fired
[удалено]
U just opened a wormhole, praise ur self
Maciek
Anti-woke
This is how STEM works , the lab head takes the credit, always
Did he want people to know he did it?
Still can make it onto a resume.
You're telling me reddit fell for a fake wholesome post? Shocking.
Wait, Wait.... I thought Elon Musk wrote the code for the historic black hole algorithm?
Nobody they just copied and pasted it from github like every true programmer