<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    I agree that virtual meetings today are vastly inferior to physical
    presence, but I wasn't suggesting that all meetings be made
    virtual.  Rather I was suggesting that orchestrating some kind of
    high profile "virtual meeting", including not only engineers but
    also government leaders, policy makers, and other "normal"
    (non-technical) people, might be a good way to surface the issues
    and cross-educate the various communities.  Politicians don't
    understand "bufferbloat" or acronyms.   Techies don't understand why
    politicians don't understand.<br>
    <br>
    But physical meetings also have limitations.   Many people do not
    have the time or money available to travel to a meeting.  Encounters
    such as hallway conversations are often very fruitful, but they only
    occur if the people involved happen to be in the same corridor at
    the same time and have time to stop and chat.   Serendipity seems
    like an imperfect strategy to make progress.<br>
    <br>
    Internet technology today is, IMHO, a rudimentary first step toward
    what could be done.  Electronic mail was a start, back in the
    1970s.  It didn't replace physical meetings, but it enabled a lot
    more progress to happen quickly.  Technology has advanced
    exponentially since then.  Perhaps there's now ways to use it
    better.<br>
    <br>
    Perhaps a conferencing scheme (software, protocols, algorithms)
    could facilitate virtual hallway encounters by noticing that several
    people have elsewhere discussed some topic, conclude that they have
    a common interest, and suggest that they get together spontaneously
    online for a hallway discussion?  Or perhaps you heard a hallway
    discussion and want to follow up, but can't remember exactly who you
    were talking with.   Computers are good at keeping records and
    searching them for patterns and overlaps even now.   As AI further
    develops, they'll hopefully get better.<br>
    <br>
    In the early days of the Internet, there were research efforts
    exploring how to *use* computers and networks in support of human
    interactions.  Some of that was technical - protocols, algorithms et
    al - but it also included social, political, and other non-technical
    aspects.   Lots of productive discussions in the early days of
    networking occurred in the hotel bar after the formal sessions --
    but only if you were staying in that hotel.   Can technology, all
    technology not just the pieces that move data, somehow facilitate
    such human interactions?  That was the focus of the research.<br>
    <br>
    I probably won't see it, but I suspect that before long it will be
    possible for human "meetings" using holographic displays, instead of
    today's flat screens.  The technology will continue to improve, not
    only in the pieces that move bits around but also in the computers
    and software that lives in our pockets, desks, cars, home
    appliances, and whatever else you can imagine.  <br>
    <br>
    Long ago I was indoctrinated into Licklider's vision of a "Galactic
    Network", which used the power of ubiquitous interconnected
    computers to help people do everything people do.  Today's Internet
    sure feels like the first incarnation of that vision.   Are
    researchers working on the next?<br>
    <br>
    Even today, you can see many "talk show" TV programs where the
    participants sit around a table and hold discussions, but several of
    them are large computer screens, and the actual people are sometimes
    continents away.  Some such presentations are visibly perfect. 
    Others suffer from audio and video dropouts, or unexpected and
    embarassing disconnects.   Are they using the Internet?  Maybe, I
    can't tell if a packet got bloated or a stagehand tripped over a
    wire.   Same result, from an end user's perspective.   Is it from an
    Internet problem?  Not enough resources, or flawed design?  Is
    anybody investigating?  Should the government make some rules?<br>
    <br>
    Still, that first Arpa principle remains and IMHO is still very
    valid.  Get the *users* involved, especially the non-technical
    ones.   Encourage, or somehow force, everyone to use what they're
    creating, envision what might be possible, and make it happen.<br>
    <br>
    Perhaps what we have today is simply the best that can be done.   I
    hope not.<br>
    <br>
    Jack Haverty<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 11/14/23 12:55, David Bray, PhD via
      Nnagain wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CA+aeVP-CfK=rn9sJZbXSPoy1Bdv=19OmWBNxa4pty+_-oci4zg@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_quote">
          <div dir="ltr">
            <div class="gmail_quote">
              <div dir="ltr">
                <div dir="ltr">
                  <div>Also a recent Nature study - audio conversations
                    are better at creative brainstorms and ideation then
                    audio+video (over whatever video platform of
                    choice). Aside from the empirical findings, the
                    proposed reason why is video has people's brains
                    trying to make sense of a non-life sized images of
                    talking heads presented to us in ways that our
                    historical evolutionary experiences is going "WTF?"
                    at the subconscious and unconscious levels. </div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div>There's even some evidence that 2D flat videos
                    actually have the body in a continuous state of
                    alertness for a potential threat - again because our
                    brains are trying to figure out whether these
                    non-life sized images of talking heads are a threat
                    or not? (Stay tuned if there's ever a lawsuit
                    against an employer for forcing employees to endure
                    too many streaming video meetings). <br>
                  </div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <h1>Virtual communication curbs creative idea
                      generation</h1>
                    <div><br>
                    </div>
                    <div><a
href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04643-y"
                        target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                        class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04643-y</a></div>
                    <div><br>
                    </div>
                    <div>
                      <b>In a laboratory study and a field experiment
                        across five countries (in Europe, the Middle
                        East and South Asia), we show that
                        videoconferencing inhibits the production of
                        creative ideas. </b><br>
                    </div>
                    <div><br>
                    </div>
                    <div>[But also]</div>
                    <div><br>
                    </div>
                    <div><b>By contrast, when it comes to selecting
                        which idea to pursue, we find no evidence that
                        videoconferencing groups are less effective (and
                        preliminary evidence that they may be more
                        effective) than in-person groups. </b><br>
                    </div>
                    <div><br>
                    </div>
                    <div>[And finally]</div>
                    <div><b><br>
                      </b></div>
                    <div><b>Specifically, using eye-gaze and recall
                        measures, as well as latent semantic analysis,
                        we demonstrate that videoconferencing hampers
                        idea generation because it focuses communicators
                        on a screen, which prompts a narrower cognitive
                        focus. Our results suggest that virtual
                        interaction comes with a cognitive cost for
                        creative idea generation.</b></div>
                  </div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                  <div><br>
                  </div>
                </div>
                <br>
                <div class="gmail_quote">
                  <div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Nov 14, 2023
                    at 3:37 PM Dick Roy via Nnagain <<a
                      href="mailto:nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>>
                    wrote:<br>
                  </div>
                  <blockquote class="gmail_quote"
style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">Stanford
                    did a study a number of years ago on how information
                    is conveyed between humans.  How much of the
                    information conveyed is contained in the words that
                    are spoken???    Answer ... less than 20%.  That
                    alone explains why F2F is sooooooo important ... <br>
                    <br>
                    -----Original Message-----<br>
                    From: Nnagain [mailto:<a
href="mailto:nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net" target="_blank"
                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">nnagain-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>]
                    On Behalf Of David Lang via Nnagain<br>
                    Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2023 12:01 PM<br>
                    To: Sebastian Moeller via Nnagain<br>
                    Cc: David Lang<br>
                    Subject: Re: [NNagain] FCC NOI due dec 1 on
                    broadband speed standards<br>
                    <br>
                    It's really hard to overhear a nearby conversation
                    that catches your interest in <br>
                    a zoom environment compared to what happens at the
                    'hallway track' when you are <br>
                    in-person<br>
                    <br>
                    If all you are interested in is the session
                    contents, then video recordings <br>
                    (possibly supplemented by the ability to ask
                    questions) is all you need.<br>
                    <br>
                    but good conferences offer much more than just that.<br>
                    <br>
                    David Lang<br>
                    <br>
                    <br>
                    On Tue, 14 Nov 2023, Sebastian Moeller via Nnagain
                    wrote:<br>
                    <br>
                    > Hi Jack,<br>
                    ><br>
                    > My argument is this is not a hard or software
                    problem, but a wetware problem, hard to shake off
                    million years of evolution. And IIRC during covid,
                    didn't the IETF do online only meetings?<br>
                    ><br>
                    > I am not saying video conferencing is doomed,
                    it came a long way in the covid years and is 'here
                    to stay', but it will only replace face to face
                    meetings for some conditions, is all I am saying....<br>
                    ><br>
                    > On 14 November 2023 14:27:28 GMT-05:00, Jack
                    Haverty <<a href="mailto:jack@3kitty.org"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">jack@3kitty.org</a>>
                    wrote:<br>
                    >> In the beginning days of the Arpanet, circa
                    early 1970s, ARPA made a policy decision about use
                    of the Arpanet.  First, Arpa Program Managers,
                    located on the East Coast of the US, were assigned
                    computer accounts on USC-ISIA, located on the West
                    Coast in LA. Thus to do their work, exchanging
                    email, editting documents, and such, they had to
                    *use* the Arpanet to connect their terminals in
                    Washington to the PDP-10 in California - 3000 miles
                    away.<br>
                    >><br>
                    >> Second, ARPA began requiring all of their
                    contractors (researchers at Universities etc.) to
                    interact with Arpa using email and FTP. If your site
                    was "on the Arpanet", you had to use the Arpanet. 
                    If you wanted your proposal for next year's research
                    to be funded, you had to submit your proposal using
                    the net.<br>
                    >><br>
                    >> This policy caused a profound attention, by
                    everyone involved, to making the Arpanet work and be
                    useful as a collaboration tool.<br>
                    >><br>
                    >> JCR Licklider (aka Lick) was my advisor at
                    MIT, and then my boss when I joined the Research
                    Staff.   Lick had been at ARPA for a while,
                    promoting his vision of a "Galactic Network" that
                    resulted in the Arpanet as a first step.  At MIT,
                    Lick still had need for lots of interactions with
                    others.   My assignment was to build and operate the
                    email system for Lick's group at MIT on our own
                    PDP-10. Lick had a terminal in his office and was
                    online a lot.   If email didn't work, I heard about
                    it.   If the Arpanet didn't work, BBN heard about
                    it.<br>
                    >><br>
                    >> This pressure was part of Arpa policy. 
                     Sometimes it's referred to as "eating your own dog
                    food" -- i.e., making sure your "dog" will get the
                    same kind of nutrition you enjoy.   IMHO, that
                    pressure policy was important, perhaps crucial, to
                    the success of the Arpanet.<br>
                    >><br>
                    >> In the 70s, meetings still occurred, but a
                    lot of progress was made through the use of the
                    Arpanet.   You can only do so much with email and
                    file interactions.  Today, the possibilities for far
                    richer interactions are much more prevalent.   But
                    IMHO they are held back, possibly because no one is
                    feeling the pressure to "make it work". Gigabit
                    throughputs are common, but why does my video and
                    audio still break up...?<br>
                    >><br>
                    >> It's important to have face-to-face
                    meetings, but perhaps if the IETF scheduled a future
                    meeting to be online only, whatever needs to happen
                    to make it work would happen?  Perhaps...<br>
                    >><br>
                    >> Even a "game" might drive progress.  At
                    Interop '92, we resurrected the old "MazeWars" game
                    using computers scattered across the show exhibit
                    halls.  The engineers in the control room above the
                    floor felt the pressure to make sure the Game
                    continued to run.  At the time, the Internet itself
                    was too slow for enjoyable gameplay at any
                    distance.   Will the Internet 30 years later work?<br>
                    >><br>
                    >> Or perhaps the IETF, or ISOC, or someone
                    could take on a highly visible demo involving
                    non-techie end users.   An online meeting of the UN
                    General Assembly?   Or some government bodies - US
                    Congress, British Parliament, etc.<br>
                    >><br>
                    >> Such an event would surface the issues,
                    both technical and policy, to the engineers,
                    corporations, policy-makers, and others who might
                    have the ability and interest to "make it work".<br>
                    >><br>
                    >> Jack<br>
                    >><br>
                    >><br>
                    >> On 11/14/23 10:10, Sebastian Moeller wrote:<br>
                    >>> Hi Jack,<br>
                    >>><br>
                    >>><br>
                    >>>> On Nov 14, 2023, at 13:02, Jack
                    Haverty via Nnagain<<a
                      href="mailto:nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>> 
                    wrote:<br>
                    >>>><br>
                    >>>> If video conferencing worked well
                    enough, they would not have to all get together in
                    one place and would instead hold IETF meetings
                    online ...?<br>
                    >>>     [SM] Turns out that humans are
                    social creatures, and some things work better
                    face-to-face and in the hallway (and if that is only
                    building trust and sympathy) than over any remote
                    technology.<br>
                    >>><br>
                    >>><br>
                    >>>> Did anyone measure latency?   Does
                    anyone measure throughput of "useful" traffic -
                    e.g., excluding video/audio data that didn't arrive
                    in time to be actually used on the screen or
                    speaker?<br>
                    >>>     [SM] Utility is in the eye of the
                    beholder, no?<br>
                    >>><br>
                    >>><br>
                    >>>> Jack Haverty<br>
                    >>>><br>
                    >>>><br>
                    >>>> On 11/14/23 09:25, Vint Cerf via
                    Nnagain wrote:<br>
                    >>>>> if they had not been all
                    together they would have been consuming tons of
                    video capacity doing video conference calls....<br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>> :-))<br>
                    >>>>> v<br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>> On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at
                    10:46 AM Livingood, Jason via Nnagain<<a
                      href="mailto:nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>> 
                    wrote:<br>
                    >>>>> On the subject of how much
                    bandwidth does one household need, here's a fun stat
                    for you.<br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>>   At the IETF’s 118th meeting
                    last week (Nov 4 – 10, 2023), there were over 1,000
                    engineers in attendance. At peak there were 870
                    devices connected to the WiFi network. Peak
                    bandwidth usage:<br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>>   • Downstream peak ~750 Mbps<br>
                    >>>>>   • Upstream ~250 Mbps<br>
                    >>>>>    From my pre-meeting Twitter
                    poll (<a
href="https://twitter.com/jlivingood/status/1720060429311901873"
                      rel="noreferrer" target="_blank"
                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://twitter.com/jlivingood/status/1720060429311901873</a>):<br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>> <image001.png><br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>>
                    _______________________________________________<br>
                    >>>>> Nnagain mailing list<br>
                    >>>>> <a
                      href="mailto:Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>
                    >>>>> <a
href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain" rel="noreferrer"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain</a><br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>> --<br>
                    >>>>> Please send any
                    postal/overnight deliveries to:<br>
                    >>>>> Vint Cerf<br>
                    >>>>> Google, LLC<br>
                    >>>>> 1900 Reston Metro Plaza, 16th
                    Floor<br>
                    >>>>> Reston, VA 20190<br>
                    >>>>> +1 (571) 213 1346<br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>> until further notice<br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>>
                    _______________________________________________<br>
                    >>>>> Nnagain mailing list<br>
                    >>>>><br>
                    >>>>> <a
                      href="mailto:Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>
                    >>>>> <a
href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain" rel="noreferrer"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain</a><br>
                    >>>>
                    _______________________________________________<br>
                    >>>> Nnagain mailing list<br>
                    >>>> <a
                      href="mailto:Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>
                    >>>> <a
href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain" rel="noreferrer"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain</a><br>
                    ><br>
                    ><br>
                    <br>
                    _______________________________________________<br>
                    Nnagain mailing list<br>
                    <a href="mailto:Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net</a><br>
                    <a
href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain" rel="noreferrer"
                      target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
                      class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain</a><br>
                  </blockquote>
                </div>
              </div>
            </div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
      <pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">_______________________________________________
Nnagain mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net">Nnagain@lists.bufferbloat.net</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain">https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/nnagain</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </body>
</html>