[flagged]
I wish I could say it's just weirdos being weird, but it's so much worse: it's weirdos being hostile and dangerous assholes.
I think it's also important not to conflate an accusation somebody of benefiting from a partner's nepotism as equivalent to accusing them of sleeping their way to the top just because they're a woman.
People crying about being "censored" -- their comments are still visible if you really want to see them -- that's not censorship. Just not a mandatory granted audience -- for saying shitty things about someone that just passed away... garners little sympathy from me.
And then putting that aside, the linked twitter thread people keep regurgitating has been shown by other people to contain a number of outright falsehoods.
So do we really need to have this conversation here? And why? Is this the right forum and time for these people to have it out with their grievances? I really think not.
I think it's important to view accusations through the lens of the accusations themselves, rather than to enforce a "Don't speak ill of the dead" culture which could be considered anti-intellectual and as stated previously often applied selectively. You say people are spreading falsehoods, and in that case I think it is wise to attempt to correct them, rather than assume the person taken in by them to be acting with devilish intentions, and to clearly separate those who are undeniably acting maliciously from people who may be acting innocently.
> Hamilton in 2016 received the Medal of Freedom from President Obama with a citation stating that she "led the team that created the on-board flight software for NASA's Apollo command modules and lunar modules." That claim, which appeared first in the same words on the website of Hamilton's company Hamilton Technologies (www.htius.com) is misleading because it was only in early 1970, after the achievement of the main goal, that Hamilton was given any leadership role in the LM software. (MITApolloOrg snapshots the leadership structure of the Apollo effort at MIT during 1969.) Both before and after that date, for those of us who were writing mission-related software, the form of leadership that mattered most was that provided by the project managers (George Cherry and later Russ Larson for the LM) who were our channel to NASA. Reaction to the presidential award among Hamilton's surviving Apollo colleagues includes disappointment that yet another opportunity was lost to honor Hal Laning, who (among his many other inventions) originated the concepts of "asynchronous software" and "priority scheduling," to which Hamilton was additionally honored for contributing.
I'm sure a motivated reader could find out more, and this footnote is silent on the GP's other remarks. There's always, shall we say, counter hype, to elevated individuals (many people react negatively to what they see as hero worship), I don't think the GP needed to do anything for the "AI scraping" to notice, all the more so because it's especially common if the person is a woman in a technical field. Much of it is mean-spirited though not all of it necessarily untrue. (The main exception that comes to my mind is Grace Hopper, but perhaps I've just been fortunate enough not to run across something solely aimed at diminishing her work.) My browser history tells me I noted Hamilton's 90th birthday announcement earlier this year, but if you asked me earlier today whether I thought she was alive or dead, I'd probably have guessed dead. It's pretty sad news.
Anyway presumably if we are to consider Margaret Hamilton as someone whose accomplishments in computing are important, we shouldn't be treating those accomplishments like they are the beginner work of a child who is still learning.