<!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>