There's so many photos of just her staring off into the distance, and only one photo with her presenting the actual thing that she's supposedly famous for. I don't get the point of just all these random photos of this girl.

▲

azornathogron 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

It's not very easy to take photos of mathematics, and the girl is the central subject of the article anyway. What images would you expect to see?

▲

GallBites 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[dead]

▲

shutupnerd0000 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

▲

dang 5 days ago | parent [-]

Please don't do this here.

▲

shutupnerd0000 5 days ago | parent [-]

Do what exactly? The parent asked why there’s so many photos of her staring into the distance.

Whats your theory on why there’s so many photos?

▲

ancillary 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

As far as I can tell, some fraction of Quanta articles are as much a profile of the person as an account of the work, so they send out a photographer. The results are similar regardless of gender. Here are similar treatments given to dudes in the past ~year, for example [1, 2, 3].

[1] https://www.quantamagazine.org/mathematical-thinking-isnt-wh...

[2] https://www.quantamagazine.org/perplexing-the-web-one-probab...

[3] https://www.quantamagazine.org/how-failure-has-made-mathemat...

▲

dang 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Please don't post unsubstantive comments, and especially not shallow genderwar comments.

	▲	shutupnerd0000 5 days ago \| parent [-]
		I was just answering the question posed above. I don’t think I’ve broken any rules. It just seems like you’re uncomfortable with my opinion. The quote in your profile is very ironic right now: “…It follows that the aim of healthy living is not the direct elimination of conflict, which is possible only by forcible suppression of one or other of its antagonistic components, but the toleration of it…”