3 ms·
> On the other hand, assuming the Post article’s mention of an “algorithm” is meant to refer to CHIRP, it is in error, since CHIRP was not used to create the cu
by anjc 8y ago
> On the other hand, assuming the Post article’s mention of an “algorithm” is meant to refer to CHIRP, it is in error, since CHIRP was not used to create the current images.
Yeah? You wouldn't find this confusing as a lay person? Many articles said she created the algorithm. As I said, she didn't "accidentally" become the face of the image. It's due to these journalistic errors.
- comex 8y agoConfusing? I said it was in error. Unfortunate, for an article written to debunk others' errors. But it is still a lot closer to the truth than what it debunks. In particular, both of the articles you linked make clear that (a) she was a meaningful participant in the project but (b) it was a large team effort and the credit doesn't belong to any one person, while (c) people on social media have created the exaggerated impression that she was solely responsible. I'm not going to blame "the media" for the existence of an exaggerated impression based on two articles that explicitly debunk that impression, even if one of them has an error. Also, while false impressions are one thing, I don't really regret that she became the face of the black hole image, per se. People fundamentally want to praise other people rather than abstract entities, and if it was going to be anyone, it might as well be the subject of such a great photo – the juxtaposition of the laptop (with black hole image visible) and the look on her face really captures the idea and emotion of scientific accomplishment.