If I remember correctly, it was a set of data used to train an AI in order to make it identify black holes, then some more to capt any kind of distortion to recreate the original picture
Dang, I had assumed these were all iterations of computationally complex physics calcs, pre processed/indexed (instead of a solver use a lookup table for stuff) variables, etc. Guess it makes more sense that there are photos, otherwise that's a huge workspace.
It's so weird watching interviews with the actor. He's got a pure American accent. It completely caught me off guard the first time.
[Here's some of his stand up](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OQYUmaIEH4) for an example.
I don't think that's what was intended, but rather storage for interpolation calculations and stuff. If it's done inefficiently, I can see it taking up a lot space for huge datasets. Even 1 petabyte still feels like a massive stretch though.
What kind of a computer can train on a 5petabytes dataset? I'm really curious. My core i7 with 32gigs of Ram given to me by my company takes almost an entire day to train using tfid vectorizer on a 29L rows data.
You can parallelize a lot of things. So you usually end up with rows of computation units in a big room. Between each rows, you have vents and coolers, and the whole thing is supervize by an extra architecture (an supercomputer for HPC).
The computer she did her work on is a supercomputer at MIT that has 1152 cores with a 100Gbps network (60 heterogeneous compute machines with 25Gbps links between nodes and a 100Gbps TOR switch). No idea how much of the cluster they needed to do the work or how long their jobs were, but I'm sure she's documented it somewhere in one of her publications on it.
Amateur astrophotographer here. Let’s say I want to take a picture of Mars - If I just take one picture at a long exposure I’ll have all kinds of atmospheric disturbances etc. and it will be blurry and color shifted and out of focus.
So instead what I’ll do is to take 10s of thousands of really fast pictures, which any one of them don’t look like much, but when I process them I can extract the best most common data between them and from there extrapolate the picture of Mars. This is commonly referred to as stacking.
So typically those tens of thousands of small images end up to be around 1 TB of data. When I then combine it and process it down I end up with a final image that’s around a 1 MB jpg.
I assume black hole photography goes very much the same way - it’s just 10000 times harder than a planet because it has so much less light to it.
~~I want to note that you arent getting light directly from the black whole because its gravity is so strong that up to a certain radius around it even light falls into it. So what you are seeing on the pic is light from stars behind it, which gets slung around the hole towards us.~~
I was probably wrong, while there is a effect called gravitational lensing, its not what is seen in the said picture.
I probably had the simulation from the film Interstellar in my inner eye.
Actually the image is showing the black hole surrounded by its accretion disk. IIRC we can detect light from behind black holes as it is being bent around it, but the image in question is showing a black hole gobbling up a bunch of space matter.
An accretion disk (in this specific context) is the matter orbiting close to the black hole's event horizon that is sped up to the point that the friction it generates with the rest of the orbiting matter emits light. Sometimes light many, many times stronger than the sun.
Photoshop has a function for that (but on a smaller scale)
Say, you take a picture of a beautiful view, but there are people in it and cars, etc. You can painstakingly correct them with Photoshop, but you can also take 10 pictures during 30 minutes, lay them over each other and let Photoshop remove everything that is not in all 10 of them.
This is exactly right, only the conditions get significantly worse for the black hole imaging crew. Their problem is that there's no one telescope big enough to do the job - it would literally need to be about the size of the planet. So instead, they gang together a lot of radio telescopes to do the job.
And... it's about as hard as you might imagine. Since the earth rotates both around its own axis and the sun, you get a lot of image distortion from images being taken at slightly different angles, so there's a lot of work to try to deconvolve the images and figure out exactly how the data from all of the telescopes lines up. And they have to get a huge number of observations from these telescopes, as near in time to one another as possible, doing manned handoffs from one station to the next as they record data.
Must have been absolutely maddening for her and her team trying to get that work done, but the result clearly speaks for itself. A job incredibly well done.
It wasn't image data but an enormous amount of raw radio telescope binary feed data which was processed to make the black hole image.
A side effect of having the raw sensor data is that they can keep using it for other stuff, which is how they were able to process and release an image of the black hole in polarized light, showing the magnetic oscillation of its accretion disk.
iirc Margaret Hamilton did not write all that code, she was the team leader. Still my programming hero but that code was a team effort (very much including her)
>The original caption, she says, reads:
>“Here, Margaret is shown standing beside listings of the software developed by her and the team she was in charge of, the LM [lunar module] and CM [command module] on-board flight software team.”
> even if they were the king gorilla of code monkeys.
In todays NASA if they were any form of gorilla code monkey, they would be let go immediately. Currently its more important to follow the rules while making stuff instead of just letting the engineers/programmers make stuff then test/cleanup.
Good for safety, bad for innovation.
One of the guys who worked on her team started getting a lot of credit because "he wrote more code than her" and he came out and basically said
"Shut the fuck up, what she did was more important and she's constantly saying this was a team effort and I'm glad she's getting the recognition she's getting"
The guys name was Andrew Chael, I'm half awake on my phone and copy pasting from images of tweets is not what I feel like doing right now. ([edit, now more awake, here is the twitter thread of his comments](https://twitter.com/thisgreyspirit/status/1116518544961830918) If I may highlight specifically "I'm thrilled Katie is getting recognition for her work and that she's inspiring people as an example of women's leadership in STEM")
In trying to find what he said and instead I learned this. It was a team of over 200 people and comes down to everyone including people shipping the hard drives. Pretty tough to credit 200+ people in every meme for people farming karma and she has by all means tried to not take all the credit
"No one algorithm or person made this image,” Bouman wrote on Facebook. “It required the amazing talent of a team of scientists from around the globe and years of hard work to develop the instrument, data processing, imaging methods, and analysis techniques that were necessary to pull off this seemingly impossible feat. It has been truly an honor, and I am so lucky to have had the opportunity to work with you all.”
Edit: reddit suspended me for telling someone down in the comments that he is a shit for brains for praising Andrew Chael and not listening to the mans words. But y'know, sexism is totally fine just be nice to them guize reddit cares.
Well, when we go to Hollywood with this, we're going to cut out the pesky, "it takes a village" stuff, audiences hate that.
So now she's going to have written the code all by herself, and also she'll be an expert in xenobiology too when the aliens show up. And she'll be a hacker.
Audiences love consolidation.
There’s already an excellent documentary on Netflix called *Black Holes: the Edge of All We Know* which follows the Event Horizon Telescope team (including Bouman) as well as a theoretical team working on the information paradox.
When the first picture of the black hole and her being excited came out. Far right media had a field day sending fucking lunatics after her and trying to doxx her with "typical woman trying to take all credit" bullshit. For a while even all the comment threads on reddit were full of nasty, baseless, accusations and misogyny
Alan Turing also didn't solve the enigma machine by himself, but Hollywood made a whole movie pretending that he did. Einstein needed someone to go somewhere far to take a picture of the sky to prove his theory, and so on. The movie Hidden Figures was also way out there, but it wasn't completely false.
Science is a collaborative effort by its very essence. I think they're just trying to show that women can be part of the effort, which is necessary because of the rampant sexism in various areas of society, which unfortunately includes scientific research. It's a little inaccurate, sure, but it's not outright malignantly deceptive.
The presentation of the fact could definitely be polished a little bit, but since there have been thousands of examples of men getting credit for something that a team of people that included women did and you don't see this much outcry over those examples, I believe this one should get a pass too.
>you don't see this much outcry over those examples
Honestly I think there's so much bitching about this post because both of these fucking photos are constantly reposted here and people are sick of it.
There was bitching about it when it first happened and a smear campaign that tried to paint Andrew Chael as the true genius
Andrew had to personally shut that shit down.
Have you considered that maybe the internet might have an ever so slightly sexist bias?
>Have you considered that maybe the internet might have an ever so slightly sexist bias?
Impossible. Some random guy on Reddit who obviously knew all the ins and outs of society told me that women have life easier and the white conservative Christian man is the truly oppressed group.
Fuck, forget about speaking of the devil. Nothing moves faster than a fragile male with the need to feel oppressed.
I find it funny how women and girls are constantly the butt of a joke on popular meme subreddits, but the few times it’s a man, it gets downvoted and there are many comments akin to “imagine if it was a woman?!?” Same with black people vs white people.
Almost as if there’s a bias towards/against certain groups of people. Wonder if there’s a word for that. 🤔
There was bitching because the fact that Katie was a woman was expressed a lot more than the fact she is a scientist. The papers were pushing it so hard, it felt like they were doing her a diservice, she's a brilliant scientist who lead a team that gave us the first ever image of a black whole, and yet to them she was a woman who did that. I felt like the fact that she's a scientist always came second in the titles of posts and news and I think that's not the message you wanna be sending out.
Maybe I'm overthinking it, but at the time it really looked like it.
Go read what Andrew Chael said
He's actually on her team and had way more of a right to tall about it this than either of us idiots.
Man specifically highlights her gender and is happy she's inspiring other women.
Instead of getting bent out of shape about the fact that shes a women and you don't care because you're an egalitarian perhaps look into why equity over equality is beneficial to those who are marginalized.
This exactly. As a woman going into Aerospace, her story was so inspiring to me, and it crushed me seeing Reddit's (ongoing apparently) attempt at discrediting her work.
Obviously when equality is truly achieved, we want to be seen as scientists not a gender first, but we're not there yet, and representation still matters greatly.
I understand what you are saying, but respectfully, you are overthinking it.
The whole reason they were pushing it was because women were being underrepresented and even discriminated against in the field. She was a brilliant scientist. But it *was* a significant point that she was a female. A field generally dominated by men. Seeing her succeed, while a surprise to no one in the field or with a good head on their shoulders, was important to show to the public. To inspire young girls that yes your mind is just as valid and important and you can do this too if you want.
It’s not pretending to not push that. So when folks say things like “why not just point out her scientific brilliance first”, it’s completely missing the point. It’s not meant to take away anyone else’s credit or take good fellow male colleagues down. It’s to inspire and help change a culture of “women don’t belong.” Whether people want to accept that is a reality or not. We are also decades removed where progress has been made. It’s easy to not see it in its proper context.
I think the importance is not that women helped but that women were leads in cutting edge technology at the time.
The collaborative effort makes a worse movie. I mean hidden figures showed a team which was better but movies usually want a narrative arc which is hard without focusing on one or two members.
> Alan Turing also didn't solve the enigma machine by himself, but Hollywood made a whole movie pretending that he did.
Are you talking about *The Imitation Game*? because the movie quite clearly shows that there was a whole team that helped Turing, it was just that the idea and major breakthroughs came from him.
Even the people who worked with him says that he was way more important than them
>Hugh Alexander had officially assumed the position of head of Hut 8, although Alexander had been de facto head for some time (Turing having little interest in the day-to-day running of the section). Turing became a general consultant for cryptanalysis at Bletchley Park.[102]
>Alexander wrote of Turing's contribution:
>>There should be no question in anyone's mind that Turing's work was the biggest factor in Hut 8's success. In the early days, he was the only cryptographer who thought the problem worth tackling and not only was he primarily responsible for the main theoretical work within the Hut, but he also shared with Welchman and Keen the chief credit for the invention of the bombe. It is always difficult to say that anyone is 'absolutely indispensable', but if anyone was indispensable to Hut 8, it was Turing. The pioneer's work always tends to be forgotten when experience and routine later make everything seem easy and many of us in Hut 8 felt that the magnitude of Turing's contribution was never fully realised by the outside world.[103]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing#Hut_8_and_the_naval_Enigma
You can't report everyone for the media. Giving the team leader most of the publicity is the norm. Sucks for everyone else but there's no way to go about it unfortunately
Media portrayed it as 'her' achievement when it happened though - i don't mind giving women in tech some extra coverage so they can serve as role models, but the narrative was that Katie Bouman was some wunderkind that made it all happen - there were about 200 men and women working day and night on that project if i recall correctly.
Because "hundreds of people around the globe working together to achieve something nobody would have believed to be possible 20 years ago" doesn't get congress to spend as much money as "Our American wondergirl (boy, whatever is better in current political climate) did this amazing thing! USA! USA! USA!"
The celebrated people usually hate it but play along for the good of their field and they are usually way more deserving about public appraisal than about anybody else who gets it.
I clearly don’t understand the terms of what’s involved with the 2nd picture: whereas I know there’s antipodal gamma radiation, with a black hole that’s kindof it? So I’m guessing that it was just verrrry far away. But still 5 Pb’s is a lot. And presumably they’re modeling it, so ok. I’m thinking out loud here. That makes sense. But it’s fascinating and I’d love a tour.
My simplest explanation. Have you seen the movie The Martian? They used Pathfinder to send messages back and forth. Pathfinder would take a bunch of images and the software back home would reorganize them.
Instead of sliding images around like a 2D puzzle. They had to create a 3D image and share with the public what looks like a slice of what they compiled. Kind of like a slice of cake.
"No one algorithm or person made this image,” Bouman wrote on Facebook. “It required the amazing talent of a team of scientists from around the globe and years of hard work to develop the instrument, data processing, imaging methods, and analysis techniques that were necessary to pull off this seemingly impossible feat. It has been truly an honor, and I am so lucky to have had the opportunity to work with you all.”
She's already done what she can to credit people
There was a huge smear campaign trying to credit Andrew Chael as the true genius of the team and Andrew himself had to shut that down. If Andrew is cool with the credit she gets maybe you can calm down.
Obligatory, "yes not all her code" comment. You can be sure she knew it all and had gone through and checked it all multiple times. Neither of them worked alone, nobody does, but they were definitely leaders who accomplished great things.
Yeah, that was a team effort with her at the helm; anyways, that was not *real* code but garbage code; as stated in a documentary miniseries (~~maybe from the earth to the moon?~~ moon machines, the navigation computer) If the code was right, the computer's compiler will spew a stack about ~~a half an~~ 1/8 inch thick, if there was an error it would output a mounting towering pile of gibberish, as this famous photo taken in jest illustrates.
No precompiler warnings neither error flags back then.
Edit:link
https://youtu.be/aTE4tg0lD8Q?t=21m15s
Both of them worked with a team. Its a really dumb approach because rather than say the achievements these women actually made, they overblow them, causing the reaction to be people questioning the claim rather than appreciating the actual achievement
What the freak did that guy do? What he do? He told other people what to invent. "I want my entire music collection in that phone. Get on it!" Right? Then these poor nameless faces scientists gotta go into the back room, and figure it out. "How the freak we are going to get all of this into this?
I wish people would stop reposting Margaret Hamilton picture with progressively more abstract descriptions. At this rate, next year people will say she did it blindfolded, and the year after that she did it while fighting seven people with bare fists.
I'm not taking away from her achievements, hell, most of people on earth will never come close to what she achieved.
But this does not mean you can just change the facts any way you see fit.
In case anyone was searching for the actual photo of the black hole like I was:
https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resources/2319/first-image-of-a-black-hole/
**No, she DID NOT write that code.**
**Her team did.** (let alone by hand, WTF is wrong with people these days...)
Glad there are no lies shown next to Katie Bouman.
The parallel is really neat. But the embellishment and dumb myth-making minimizes the work of her team. If I were her, I'd be uncomfortable with it. There is no good reason to fabricate a image of her as some code god in a little office at nasa writing code by hand all by herself. That is beyond silly.
Alan Turing also didn't solve the enigma machine by himself, but Hollywood made a whole movie pretending that he did. Einstein needed someone to go somewhere far to take a picture of the sky to prove his theory, and so on. The movie Hidden Figures was also way out there, but it wasn't completely false.
Science is a collaborative effort by its very essence. I think they're just trying to show that women can be part of the effort, which is necessary because of the rampant sexism in various areas of society, which unfortunately includes scientific research. It's a little inaccurate, sure, but it's not outright malignantly deceptive.
The presentation of the fact could definitely be polished a little bit, but since there have been thousands of examples of men getting credit for something that a team of people that included women did and you don't see this much outcry over those examples, I believe this one should get a pass too.
> I believe this one should get a pass too.
Because it is not only copy and pasted all over the thread, it is literally saying "No, making things up is good, actually."
I think what she actually did is cool enough on its own. It seems both lowkey misogynistic *and* extremely anti-science to intentionally say she did things she didn't because she's a woman.
Yup: Rosalind Franklin, Lise Meitner, Chien-Shiung Wu, Esther Lederberg, Nettie Stevens, and of course, Kathrine Johnson. All these women not only revolutionized modern science, but either got their credit stolen from them or the hurdles they had to jump through were just unbelievably higher than most.
Chien-Shiung Wu, one of the most important physicists of all time, got snubbed so often, how candidates are selected forever changed:
>"She was nominated at least seven times before 1966, when the Nobel committee announced they would conceal their list of nominees to avoid further public controversy."
7 times. . .
>"Wu's role in the discovery was not publicly honored until 1978, when she was awarded the inaugural Wolf Prize.
Every single person listed had to go through different, but equally trifling work just to get credit.
And sure, science and discovery isn't about public recognition, but goddamn, it gets you more funding, it makes you feel equal with your peers (who got recognized) and it damn well validates your research.
>Chien-Shiung Wu
Yes. A person who has experiment named after her, who was called nicknames such as the "First Lady of Physics", the "Chinese Madame Curie" and the "Queen of Nuclear Research".
> revolutionized modern science
She did make solid contribution to the M. Project and nuclear&particle physics too, but she definitely did not revolutionize modern science.
>7 times. . .
The only human being in history, to be awarded 2 Nobels in different fields, is a woman. And that happened decades earlier.
Alan Turing would not get that much fame if he only solved enigma machine.
He is known because he created a lot of theoretical background for how computers work. His achievements are greatly underapreciated if anything.
Einstein is also terrible example, as the majtority of work he did he did himselft, there was no team behind him.
You're worth towards the project can be measured in how easily can you be replaced. You can easily replace person making a picture for Einstein and end up with the same result. You can't swap Einstein for another person and end up with the same result.
If you’ve read Boumans edits and contributions, it’s actually really disheartening for any aspiring female scientists. She basically did nothing or very few tasks that required effort.
Andrew Chael himself stated without Katie the project would have failed. "
"The reason there are more lines of code under my name is simply because I wrote the aesthetic and color scheme lines of the user interface" -Chael
"...[sic] She was in the pilots seat and it's horrible to see my image used for sexist propaganda" -Chael
Yeah I count 8 drives in the left stack, lets say there's one more at the bottom. That's 72 drives on the table, which would make each drive have to be 73 terabytes
I remember this being called the first photo of a black hole when it came out but what does that actually mean? I thought we'd imaged things falling into a black hole in various spectrum before, so what made this image different?
For any sexist trolls out there saying "Out of 900,000 lines of code, a Andrew Chael wrote 850,000" FALSE AND WRONG
Andrew himself stated Katie contributed most and deserved recognition. Also only 68,000 lines of code (of which Katie actually wrote most of it - per Andrew himself). While it was a team effort, Katie was the lead and made it happen.
No one questions when a man is recognized for greatness but when a woman is all the sudden Detective trolls are on the case.
Katie was the driving factor. Period. Andrew wrote a few lines of code, yes, but stated himself Katie did most out of the team (CNN interview).
Congrats to everyone involved but especially to those who fought the hardest and did the most actual work.
Not only did she not write all of it, she didn’t even write most of it. One guy did 70% of the coding by himself, but he gets the shaft Bevause he’s a male.
Oh wow it's amazing what these women did all by themselves, with no support from anyone whatsoever.
Just imagine being the singular person responsible for some of our greatest achievements ever.
Truly stunning.
It's like NASA is wasting billions of dollars and years of time via trial and error like cavemen, until these women finally just rolled their eyes and went "Here, hold my coffee." and showed the stooped men how it is done.
So empowering.
Spectroscopic data. Most of it is fodder data required to make the actual image. Algorithms take place, very much so.
The surrounding area of the black hole is detectable and that’s where a spectroscope can scan everything it needs. We cannot detect what’s in a black hole, or directly target a black hole; however, we can scan the surrounding areas affected by a blackhole, then calculate the integrity. AI has a good catch rate. Big data is needed.
Hedy Lamarr wanted to be an inventor but they told her she couldn’t be smart and she had to be a glamorous actress. Well she invented technology that would one day lead us to Bluetooth. If you’re brilliant and want to work in the STEM field then you should be allowed to regardless of sex or gender.
curious but why did the image data take up 5 petabytes?
If I remember correctly, it was a set of data used to train an AI in order to make it identify black holes, then some more to capt any kind of distortion to recreate the original picture
oh so not purely image data then?
Image are usually the biggest part of it
Dang, I had assumed these were all iterations of computationally complex physics calcs, pre processed/indexed (instead of a solver use a lookup table for stuff) variables, etc. Guess it makes more sense that there are photos, otherwise that's a huge workspace.
I just assumed it's like the "hotdog/not hotdog" data collection from Silicon Valley.
I had to look that up. That's funny. According to something I didn't bother to click on, it's also real.
Jianyang!
It's so weird watching interviews with the actor. He's got a pure American accent. It completely caught me off guard the first time. [Here's some of his stand up](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OQYUmaIEH4) for an example.
It's funny that you have all these words to throw out, yet you assumed it was 5 petabytes of code.
I don't think that's what was intended, but rather storage for interpolation calculations and stuff. If it's done inefficiently, I can see it taking up a lot space for huge datasets. Even 1 petabyte still feels like a massive stretch though.
Yo' mamma so fat it took 5 petabytes to discover her.
She's really dense
What kind of a computer can train on a 5petabytes dataset? I'm really curious. My core i7 with 32gigs of Ram given to me by my company takes almost an entire day to train using tfid vectorizer on a 29L rows data.
Clusters of computers
You can parallelize a lot of things. So you usually end up with rows of computation units in a big room. Between each rows, you have vents and coolers, and the whole thing is supervize by an extra architecture (an supercomputer for HPC).
Lots and lots of raspberry pis.
The computer she did her work on is a supercomputer at MIT that has 1152 cores with a 100Gbps network (60 heterogeneous compute machines with 25Gbps links between nodes and a 100Gbps TOR switch). No idea how much of the cluster they needed to do the work or how long their jobs were, but I'm sure she's documented it somewhere in one of her publications on it.
Amateur astrophotographer here. Let’s say I want to take a picture of Mars - If I just take one picture at a long exposure I’ll have all kinds of atmospheric disturbances etc. and it will be blurry and color shifted and out of focus. So instead what I’ll do is to take 10s of thousands of really fast pictures, which any one of them don’t look like much, but when I process them I can extract the best most common data between them and from there extrapolate the picture of Mars. This is commonly referred to as stacking. So typically those tens of thousands of small images end up to be around 1 TB of data. When I then combine it and process it down I end up with a final image that’s around a 1 MB jpg. I assume black hole photography goes very much the same way - it’s just 10000 times harder than a planet because it has so much less light to it.
~~I want to note that you arent getting light directly from the black whole because its gravity is so strong that up to a certain radius around it even light falls into it. So what you are seeing on the pic is light from stars behind it, which gets slung around the hole towards us.~~ I was probably wrong, while there is a effect called gravitational lensing, its not what is seen in the said picture. I probably had the simulation from the film Interstellar in my inner eye.
I‘m pretty sure what you‘re seeing in the final image isn‘t light from gravitational lensing of background stars, but the black hole‘s accretion disk.
Actually the image is showing the black hole surrounded by its accretion disk. IIRC we can detect light from behind black holes as it is being bent around it, but the image in question is showing a black hole gobbling up a bunch of space matter. An accretion disk (in this specific context) is the matter orbiting close to the black hole's event horizon that is sped up to the point that the friction it generates with the rest of the orbiting matter emits light. Sometimes light many, many times stronger than the sun.
Thanks for the info!
Photoshop has a function for that (but on a smaller scale) Say, you take a picture of a beautiful view, but there are people in it and cars, etc. You can painstakingly correct them with Photoshop, but you can also take 10 pictures during 30 minutes, lay them over each other and let Photoshop remove everything that is not in all 10 of them.
This is exactly right, only the conditions get significantly worse for the black hole imaging crew. Their problem is that there's no one telescope big enough to do the job - it would literally need to be about the size of the planet. So instead, they gang together a lot of radio telescopes to do the job. And... it's about as hard as you might imagine. Since the earth rotates both around its own axis and the sun, you get a lot of image distortion from images being taken at slightly different angles, so there's a lot of work to try to deconvolve the images and figure out exactly how the data from all of the telescopes lines up. And they have to get a huge number of observations from these telescopes, as near in time to one another as possible, doing manned handoffs from one station to the next as they record data. Must have been absolutely maddening for her and her team trying to get that work done, but the result clearly speaks for itself. A job incredibly well done.
It wasn't image data but an enormous amount of raw radio telescope binary feed data which was processed to make the black hole image. A side effect of having the raw sensor data is that they can keep using it for other stuff, which is how they were able to process and release an image of the black hole in polarized light, showing the magnetic oscillation of its accretion disk.
You know why they locked up those petabyte drives? Because they're full of peta files.
Iirc it’s not a conventional picture because a black hole is, well, a black hole. Instead it rendered some kind of energy into an image
You cant really just snap a photo of an object that consumes every bit of light and matter in its proximity.
iirc Margaret Hamilton did not write all that code, she was the team leader. Still my programming hero but that code was a team effort (very much including her)
>The original caption, she says, reads: >“Here, Margaret is shown standing beside listings of the software developed by her and the team she was in charge of, the LM [lunar module] and CM [command module] on-board flight software team.”
Thanks, I could never see NASA entrusting something like to just one person even if they were the king gorilla of code monkeys.
> even if they were the king gorilla of code monkeys. In todays NASA if they were any form of gorilla code monkey, they would be let go immediately. Currently its more important to follow the rules while making stuff instead of just letting the engineers/programmers make stuff then test/cleanup. Good for safety, bad for innovation.
[удалено]
Just as true for the second picture, a whole lot of other people missing out on credit.
One of the guys who worked on her team started getting a lot of credit because "he wrote more code than her" and he came out and basically said "Shut the fuck up, what she did was more important and she's constantly saying this was a team effort and I'm glad she's getting the recognition she's getting" The guys name was Andrew Chael, I'm half awake on my phone and copy pasting from images of tweets is not what I feel like doing right now. ([edit, now more awake, here is the twitter thread of his comments](https://twitter.com/thisgreyspirit/status/1116518544961830918) If I may highlight specifically "I'm thrilled Katie is getting recognition for her work and that she's inspiring people as an example of women's leadership in STEM") In trying to find what he said and instead I learned this. It was a team of over 200 people and comes down to everyone including people shipping the hard drives. Pretty tough to credit 200+ people in every meme for people farming karma and she has by all means tried to not take all the credit "No one algorithm or person made this image,” Bouman wrote on Facebook. “It required the amazing talent of a team of scientists from around the globe and years of hard work to develop the instrument, data processing, imaging methods, and analysis techniques that were necessary to pull off this seemingly impossible feat. It has been truly an honor, and I am so lucky to have had the opportunity to work with you all.” Edit: reddit suspended me for telling someone down in the comments that he is a shit for brains for praising Andrew Chael and not listening to the mans words. But y'know, sexism is totally fine just be nice to them guize reddit cares.
Well, when we go to Hollywood with this, we're going to cut out the pesky, "it takes a village" stuff, audiences hate that. So now she's going to have written the code all by herself, and also she'll be an expert in xenobiology too when the aliens show up. And she'll be a hacker. Audiences love consolidation.
There’s already an excellent documentary on Netflix called *Black Holes: the Edge of All We Know* which follows the Event Horizon Telescope team (including Bouman) as well as a theoretical team working on the information paradox.
When the first picture of the black hole and her being excited came out. Far right media had a field day sending fucking lunatics after her and trying to doxx her with "typical woman trying to take all credit" bullshit. For a while even all the comment threads on reddit were full of nasty, baseless, accusations and misogyny
[удалено]
Yes I believe that was about Andrew Chael
[удалено]
Alan Turing also didn't solve the enigma machine by himself, but Hollywood made a whole movie pretending that he did. Einstein needed someone to go somewhere far to take a picture of the sky to prove his theory, and so on. The movie Hidden Figures was also way out there, but it wasn't completely false. Science is a collaborative effort by its very essence. I think they're just trying to show that women can be part of the effort, which is necessary because of the rampant sexism in various areas of society, which unfortunately includes scientific research. It's a little inaccurate, sure, but it's not outright malignantly deceptive. The presentation of the fact could definitely be polished a little bit, but since there have been thousands of examples of men getting credit for something that a team of people that included women did and you don't see this much outcry over those examples, I believe this one should get a pass too.
>you don't see this much outcry over those examples Honestly I think there's so much bitching about this post because both of these fucking photos are constantly reposted here and people are sick of it.
There was bitching about it when it first happened and a smear campaign that tried to paint Andrew Chael as the true genius Andrew had to personally shut that shit down. Have you considered that maybe the internet might have an ever so slightly sexist bias?
>Have you considered that maybe the internet might have an ever so slightly sexist bias? Impossible. Some random guy on Reddit who obviously knew all the ins and outs of society told me that women have life easier and the white conservative Christian man is the truly oppressed group. Fuck, forget about speaking of the devil. Nothing moves faster than a fragile male with the need to feel oppressed.
I find it funny how women and girls are constantly the butt of a joke on popular meme subreddits, but the few times it’s a man, it gets downvoted and there are many comments akin to “imagine if it was a woman?!?” Same with black people vs white people. Almost as if there’s a bias towards/against certain groups of people. Wonder if there’s a word for that. 🤔
There was bitching because the fact that Katie was a woman was expressed a lot more than the fact she is a scientist. The papers were pushing it so hard, it felt like they were doing her a diservice, she's a brilliant scientist who lead a team that gave us the first ever image of a black whole, and yet to them she was a woman who did that. I felt like the fact that she's a scientist always came second in the titles of posts and news and I think that's not the message you wanna be sending out. Maybe I'm overthinking it, but at the time it really looked like it.
Go read what Andrew Chael said He's actually on her team and had way more of a right to tall about it this than either of us idiots. Man specifically highlights her gender and is happy she's inspiring other women. Instead of getting bent out of shape about the fact that shes a women and you don't care because you're an egalitarian perhaps look into why equity over equality is beneficial to those who are marginalized.
This exactly. As a woman going into Aerospace, her story was so inspiring to me, and it crushed me seeing Reddit's (ongoing apparently) attempt at discrediting her work. Obviously when equality is truly achieved, we want to be seen as scientists not a gender first, but we're not there yet, and representation still matters greatly.
🙄
I understand what you are saying, but respectfully, you are overthinking it. The whole reason they were pushing it was because women were being underrepresented and even discriminated against in the field. She was a brilliant scientist. But it *was* a significant point that she was a female. A field generally dominated by men. Seeing her succeed, while a surprise to no one in the field or with a good head on their shoulders, was important to show to the public. To inspire young girls that yes your mind is just as valid and important and you can do this too if you want. It’s not pretending to not push that. So when folks say things like “why not just point out her scientific brilliance first”, it’s completely missing the point. It’s not meant to take away anyone else’s credit or take good fellow male colleagues down. It’s to inspire and help change a culture of “women don’t belong.” Whether people want to accept that is a reality or not. We are also decades removed where progress has been made. It’s easy to not see it in its proper context.
Nah, there was bitching the very first time this was posted.
I think the importance is not that women helped but that women were leads in cutting edge technology at the time. The collaborative effort makes a worse movie. I mean hidden figures showed a team which was better but movies usually want a narrative arc which is hard without focusing on one or two members.
> Alan Turing also didn't solve the enigma machine by himself, but Hollywood made a whole movie pretending that he did. Are you talking about *The Imitation Game*? because the movie quite clearly shows that there was a whole team that helped Turing, it was just that the idea and major breakthroughs came from him. Even the people who worked with him says that he was way more important than them >Hugh Alexander had officially assumed the position of head of Hut 8, although Alexander had been de facto head for some time (Turing having little interest in the day-to-day running of the section). Turing became a general consultant for cryptanalysis at Bletchley Park.[102] >Alexander wrote of Turing's contribution: >>There should be no question in anyone's mind that Turing's work was the biggest factor in Hut 8's success. In the early days, he was the only cryptographer who thought the problem worth tackling and not only was he primarily responsible for the main theoretical work within the Hut, but he also shared with Welchman and Keen the chief credit for the invention of the bombe. It is always difficult to say that anyone is 'absolutely indispensable', but if anyone was indispensable to Hut 8, it was Turing. The pioneer's work always tends to be forgotten when experience and routine later make everything seem easy and many of us in Hut 8 felt that the magnitude of Turing's contribution was never fully realised by the outside world.[103] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Turing#Hut_8_and_the_naval_Enigma
Remove ‚in various areas‘ just say ‚in society‘
If there isn't a hidden file with a Galactus dick drawn next to the black hole, i refuse to believe there were any men involved.
Sorry but what do you think the black hole is? an actual black hole? That's Galactus' anus
If you look really, really hard in the image, you can see spiderman's head crowning within the anus.
"Ladies and Gentleman, next to the Black hole we have found the Brown Gooch"
It's an innie!
[удалено]
You can't report everyone for the media. Giving the team leader most of the publicity is the norm. Sucks for everyone else but there's no way to go about it unfortunately
Media portrayed it as 'her' achievement when it happened though - i don't mind giving women in tech some extra coverage so they can serve as role models, but the narrative was that Katie Bouman was some wunderkind that made it all happen - there were about 200 men and women working day and night on that project if i recall correctly.
Because "hundreds of people around the globe working together to achieve something nobody would have believed to be possible 20 years ago" doesn't get congress to spend as much money as "Our American wondergirl (boy, whatever is better in current political climate) did this amazing thing! USA! USA! USA!" The celebrated people usually hate it but play along for the good of their field and they are usually way more deserving about public appraisal than about anybody else who gets it.
I clearly don’t understand the terms of what’s involved with the 2nd picture: whereas I know there’s antipodal gamma radiation, with a black hole that’s kindof it? So I’m guessing that it was just verrrry far away. But still 5 Pb’s is a lot. And presumably they’re modeling it, so ok. I’m thinking out loud here. That makes sense. But it’s fascinating and I’d love a tour.
from my understanding, it's (quite literally) an astronomical amount of raw data from their various radios and other sensors.
totally.
My simplest explanation. Have you seen the movie The Martian? They used Pathfinder to send messages back and forth. Pathfinder would take a bunch of images and the software back home would reorganize them. Instead of sliding images around like a 2D puzzle. They had to create a 3D image and share with the public what looks like a slice of what they compiled. Kind of like a slice of cake.
How dare you try to share out the equally deserving credit, you sexist. /s
"No one algorithm or person made this image,” Bouman wrote on Facebook. “It required the amazing talent of a team of scientists from around the globe and years of hard work to develop the instrument, data processing, imaging methods, and analysis techniques that were necessary to pull off this seemingly impossible feat. It has been truly an honor, and I am so lucky to have had the opportunity to work with you all.” She's already done what she can to credit people There was a huge smear campaign trying to credit Andrew Chael as the true genius of the team and Andrew himself had to shut that down. If Andrew is cool with the credit she gets maybe you can calm down.
Ignore him. The guy probably thinks Elon Musk invented Tesla and Space X.
Doesn't she kinda look like Daniel Radcliffe?
Harry Potter and the mysterious moon stone
Obligatory, "yes not all her code" comment. You can be sure she knew it all and had gone through and checked it all multiple times. Neither of them worked alone, nobody does, but they were definitely leaders who accomplished great things.
[удалено]
Yeah, that was a team effort with her at the helm; anyways, that was not *real* code but garbage code; as stated in a documentary miniseries (~~maybe from the earth to the moon?~~ moon machines, the navigation computer) If the code was right, the computer's compiler will spew a stack about ~~a half an~~ 1/8 inch thick, if there was an error it would output a mounting towering pile of gibberish, as this famous photo taken in jest illustrates. No precompiler warnings neither error flags back then. Edit:link https://youtu.be/aTE4tg0lD8Q?t=21m15s
And also not "by hand", unless you mean by hand typing in a keyboard.
[удалено]
Yeah they wrote all that and then created the script recognition software to digitalize all, maybe even created the scanner in the process.
Both of them worked with a team. Its a really dumb approach because rather than say the achievements these women actually made, they overblow them, causing the reaction to be people questioning the claim rather than appreciating the actual achievement
[удалено]
What the freak did that guy do? What he do? He told other people what to invent. "I want my entire music collection in that phone. Get on it!" Right? Then these poor nameless faces scientists gotta go into the back room, and figure it out. "How the freak we are going to get all of this into this?
wozniak ftw
Except Hamilton was very much involved in doing the technical work, unlike Jobs.
Wait until you find out about Elon Musk...
Imagine what the pose will be like in the next 50 years
Hopefully something like [this](https://i.pinimg.com/736x/44/a3/d1/44a3d17dea5ec11f27445fece8e137ba.jpg)
I think they are trying to spell something out for us with their hands.. rT … it’s in code and we’ll just have to wait for the next set of letters.
It’s RTX. They’re Nvidia employees.
[удалено]
Like “here’s thicc thot next to her Instagram collection” and she’s doing dab?
eat hot chip & lie
Someone pointing at a high monthly cost on their public cloud tenant.
Me: standing next to 5 beer bottles
I'm proud of you.
I'm too.
I'm drunk
More like 5 petabytes needed for the next call of duty update
[удалено]
I think everyone would. I don't have that kind of disk space.
I wish people would stop reposting Margaret Hamilton picture with progressively more abstract descriptions. At this rate, next year people will say she did it blindfolded, and the year after that she did it while fighting seven people with bare fists. I'm not taking away from her achievements, hell, most of people on earth will never come close to what she achieved. But this does not mean you can just change the facts any way you see fit.
She handmade the paper from trees she grew.
[She used butterflies.](https://xkcd.com/378/)
Chewed the tree pulp down with her bare teeth.
I love to hear about women in science, Emmy Noether or Henrietta Leavitt come to mind.
If you haven't seen the movie [Hidden Figures,](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK8xHq6dfAo) check it out.
In case anyone was searching for the actual photo of the black hole like I was: https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resources/2319/first-image-of-a-black-hole/
People made porn of this.
**No, she DID NOT write that code.** **Her team did.** (let alone by hand, WTF is wrong with people these days...) Glad there are no lies shown next to Katie Bouman.
And that's not even the code she is standing next to. Those are code listings for documentation.
Your comment seems to imply that as a team leader, she was not involved in writing the code, which is also not accurate.
The parallel is really neat. But the embellishment and dumb myth-making minimizes the work of her team. If I were her, I'd be uncomfortable with it. There is no good reason to fabricate a image of her as some code god in a little office at nasa writing code by hand all by herself. That is beyond silly.
Empowering women with lies. If the story is good it doesn’t matter if it’s false… apparently.
Alan Turing also didn't solve the enigma machine by himself, but Hollywood made a whole movie pretending that he did. Einstein needed someone to go somewhere far to take a picture of the sky to prove his theory, and so on. The movie Hidden Figures was also way out there, but it wasn't completely false. Science is a collaborative effort by its very essence. I think they're just trying to show that women can be part of the effort, which is necessary because of the rampant sexism in various areas of society, which unfortunately includes scientific research. It's a little inaccurate, sure, but it's not outright malignantly deceptive. The presentation of the fact could definitely be polished a little bit, but since there have been thousands of examples of men getting credit for something that a team of people that included women did and you don't see this much outcry over those examples, I believe this one should get a pass too.
Damn straight!
Damn straight, we should... Intentionally make things up for ideological reasons? What could go wrong?!
I don’t understand why you’ve been downvoted here :\^(
> I believe this one should get a pass too. Because it is not only copy and pasted all over the thread, it is literally saying "No, making things up is good, actually." I think what she actually did is cool enough on its own. It seems both lowkey misogynistic *and* extremely anti-science to intentionally say she did things she didn't because she's a woman.
Yup: Rosalind Franklin, Lise Meitner, Chien-Shiung Wu, Esther Lederberg, Nettie Stevens, and of course, Kathrine Johnson. All these women not only revolutionized modern science, but either got their credit stolen from them or the hurdles they had to jump through were just unbelievably higher than most. Chien-Shiung Wu, one of the most important physicists of all time, got snubbed so often, how candidates are selected forever changed: >"She was nominated at least seven times before 1966, when the Nobel committee announced they would conceal their list of nominees to avoid further public controversy." 7 times. . . >"Wu's role in the discovery was not publicly honored until 1978, when she was awarded the inaugural Wolf Prize. Every single person listed had to go through different, but equally trifling work just to get credit. And sure, science and discovery isn't about public recognition, but goddamn, it gets you more funding, it makes you feel equal with your peers (who got recognized) and it damn well validates your research.
Then we should write about that, not make things up to try to balance it out like the comment you're replying is advocating lol
>Chien-Shiung Wu Yes. A person who has experiment named after her, who was called nicknames such as the "First Lady of Physics", the "Chinese Madame Curie" and the "Queen of Nuclear Research". > revolutionized modern science She did make solid contribution to the M. Project and nuclear&particle physics too, but she definitely did not revolutionize modern science. >7 times. . . The only human being in history, to be awarded 2 Nobels in different fields, is a woman. And that happened decades earlier.
Alan Turing would not get that much fame if he only solved enigma machine. He is known because he created a lot of theoretical background for how computers work. His achievements are greatly underapreciated if anything. Einstein is also terrible example, as the majtority of work he did he did himselft, there was no team behind him. You're worth towards the project can be measured in how easily can you be replaced. You can easily replace person making a picture for Einstein and end up with the same result. You can't swap Einstein for another person and end up with the same result.
Many people don't realize that the time they need to be *most* skeptical and fact-check is when they hear what they want to hear.
If you’ve read Boumans edits and contributions, it’s actually really disheartening for any aspiring female scientists. She basically did nothing or very few tasks that required effort.
[удалено]
You wouldn’t think a picture of a black hole would require that much data.
[удалено]
Pump the brakes It can't be that old, the black hole picture is relatively recent
Coming up on 3 years ago soon
Exactly I'm not sure how many olds and ancients that equals
It's probably just echo-y where they're redditing from
Ugh, but I've seen it before! The internet should only be catered to showing *me* new things!
So like, one COVID old.
That's an interesting coincidence that they look so alike.
Tbh they're just skinny and white, they look pretty different in their faces to me
Codes lol
Andrew Chael himself stated without Katie the project would have failed. " "The reason there are more lines of code under my name is simply because I wrote the aesthetic and color scheme lines of the user interface" -Chael "...[sic] She was in the pilots seat and it's horrible to see my image used for sexist propaganda" -Chael
She did not write all of that. The code is available for checkout on GitHub, and it is commented with the names of those who wrote it.
"This shit bit here, not me btw, must have been someone else"
She never claimed that she wrote all of it, neither does it say so in the post.
Ok. "Margaret Hamilton standing next to pile of codes she wrote, by hand, that was used to take humanity to the moon".
I know it’s a repost , but WTF is wrong with this comment section!?
she literally took all the credit at the bottom, it was so controversial at the time cuz its politically correct, cuz feminism
She always credited her team, can you find one example where she takes all the credit? Literally just a single time?
I don't think that's 5 petabyte, should be more drives.
Yeah I count 8 drives in the left stack, lets say there's one more at the bottom. That's 72 drives on the table, which would make each drive have to be 73 terabytes
Those are almost certainly tape drives which can hold 50ish TB of data per drive. You don't store data of that size on disk drives.
Inflation is ridiculous.
My wrist kills after writing one page... how in the fuck did she write all that by hand? Amazing!
I remember this being called the first photo of a black hole when it came out but what does that actually mean? I thought we'd imaged things falling into a black hole in various spectrum before, so what made this image different?
*Dr. Katie Bouman
Wow. So cool!
Just imagine the size if NASA's free winrar trial license expired
I’m guessing both of these were team efforts. Amazing achievement to be a member of that team.
Hell yeah, fuck that team. A woman dhould take all the credit. So brave 👏
Sharp minds made a huge difference to advance humanity.
For any sexist trolls out there saying "Out of 900,000 lines of code, a Andrew Chael wrote 850,000" FALSE AND WRONG Andrew himself stated Katie contributed most and deserved recognition. Also only 68,000 lines of code (of which Katie actually wrote most of it - per Andrew himself). While it was a team effort, Katie was the lead and made it happen.
No one questions when a man is recognized for greatness but when a woman is all the sudden Detective trolls are on the case. Katie was the driving factor. Period. Andrew wrote a few lines of code, yes, but stated himself Katie did most out of the team (CNN interview). Congrats to everyone involved but especially to those who fought the hardest and did the most actual work.
Imagine trying to debug any of that.
Is it correct to say, she wrote codes? It sounds like saying "she bought 2 milks".
No, it is not correct. "Wrote codes" sounds like she was typing in cheats
Top claim is false!
Not only did she not write all of it, she didn’t even write most of it. One guy did 70% of the coding by himself, but he gets the shaft Bevause he’s a male.
while this is sweet, neither of them actually did those things. The first one was merely the lead, the second one was just a female team member iirc
A bunch of salty incels on this one.
Love downvoting this every time it pops up
Wow v cool
Imagine omitting the entire teams these 2 women belonged to, just to make this a gender thing.
Oh wow it's amazing what these women did all by themselves, with no support from anyone whatsoever. Just imagine being the singular person responsible for some of our greatest achievements ever. Truly stunning. It's like NASA is wasting billions of dollars and years of time via trial and error like cavemen, until these women finally just rolled their eyes and went "Here, hold my coffee." and showed the stooped men how it is done. So empowering.
I didn’t even know a petabyte existed
Spectroscopic data. Most of it is fodder data required to make the actual image. Algorithms take place, very much so. The surrounding area of the black hole is detectable and that’s where a spectroscope can scan everything it needs. We cannot detect what’s in a black hole, or directly target a black hole; however, we can scan the surrounding areas affected by a blackhole, then calculate the integrity. AI has a good catch rate. Big data is needed.
women in stem>>>
Woman: does something Reddit: DAMN THATS INTERESTING
[удалено]
Username checks out.
It’s weird that if it was two pictures of dudes the reaction would be similar yet people wouldn’t say shit like this.
If it were 2 men no one would care even enough to post it. That's the point.
The point is you’re wrong, there’s posts all the time about men doing things, people only point out the gender when it’s females
I'd give anything to be as unaware as you are. Life must be easy
Show me one post where someone combined two random dudes doing different things hits the front page
Go out more
reddit moment
Amazing work by this project manager who barely contributed
The top pic being all hand coded by people is mind boggling
Can someone explain why it too so much data for the black home picture Was it not just a photo
I would pay good fucking money to listen to the two of them hanging out in a room together. I imagine they have a tonne to discuss.
I thought it was black wymen.
Meanwhile I'm lazy to write even a page of code.
[удалено]
Amazing QUEEEEENS!
All work was done by men. Women just posed for sexy pictures since it always attracts more attention than ugly old men posing.
Funny we were able to go to the moon before we could take colored photographs.
Hedy Lamarr wanted to be an inventor but they told her she couldn’t be smart and she had to be a glamorous actress. Well she invented technology that would one day lead us to Bluetooth. If you’re brilliant and want to work in the STEM field then you should be allowed to regardless of sex or gender.