> Then, they tried just using initials. Nothing worked.<p>Any ideas how the gender got through in the initials?<p>Edit: I guess they just recognized the initials, but nobody else said " 'Oh no, no, come on, let's stick to the science.'"<p>It seems like the initials would have worked if someone would have just said that during the review process...
<i>This means astronomers who were already established and well-known got an extra leg up.</i><p>Kind of the same story for many fields, TBH. We see it in action right here on HN when there is submission of one of @pg's essays. If those two initials weren't there, would they get the same sort of traction?
> Even before the James Webb Space Telescope was launched, for example, the first call-out for proposals drew 1,173 ideas that would require 24,500 hours of prime observing time. But only 6,000 hours were available.<p>Can someone explain this to me? I've Google'd and not gotten much. 6000 hours is like 250 days. I thought the Webb has a 10-20 life. So how does that work? How much of each "day" is prime time? and why?