Re: Concerns about Singapore

Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org> Mon, 11 April 2016 22:34 UTC

Return-Path: <rsk@gsp.org>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A72AB12F4C9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 15:34:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y5oCUzGyU6iu for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 15:34:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from taos.firemountain.net (taos.firemountain.net [207.114.3.54]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87E0D12F4B5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 15:34:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gsp.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by taos.firemountain.net (8.15.1/8.14.9) with SMTP id u3BMY5Lw027409 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 18:34:09 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 18:34:04 -0400
From: Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Concerns about Singapore
Message-ID: <20160411223403.GA6743@gsp.org>
References: <m260vp7eke.wl%randy@psg.com> <570A6458.3050206@comcast.net> <m21t6d7c9t.wl%randy@psg.com> <570A67B4.3010206@comcast.net> <570AB3AF.2050401@gmail.com> <87twj99c6w.fsf@tops.chopps.org> <CAKe6YvMyp-DyeDwpPY6KYmbDbnpgnvVk_cUStnA32wmgDWcz3w@mail.gmail.com> <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD233A62AA18@XMB122CNC.rim.net> <20160411104519.GA19092@gsp.org> <3F48466D-390C-4C18-B958-732AE3E46FF1@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <3F48466D-390C-4C18-B958-732AE3E46FF1@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/o9WMq7LeVbWKz5prR4qa16j7H9o>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 22:34:13 -0000

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 03:17:39PM +0300, Yoav Nir wrote:
> I don???t believe that this technology exists. 

People have remote meetings all day, every day.   Lots of technology
exists, more is being invented all the time.  Perhaps (to follow
on your mention of Meetecho in 1995) if 20 years had been invested
in making it work for the IETF then it would be working by now.

> Yeah, perhaps, some day when we???re all wearing virtual reality
> headsets and our avatars are hanging out in a virtual venue, and we all
> have sufficient equipment and bandwidth to handle all that. We???re not
> there yet.

Nor is there any need to go there.  Meetings do not require VR.

> Virtual meetings with the technology we have today makes it very hard
> for people with mediocre English to follow the discussion.

That's (a) not a very big problem and (b) a solvable problem.  


What I'm hearing is a lot of we've-always-done-it-this-way.  Well,
that's not working very well except for the privileged elite few
(most of whom are backed by corporations).  And I understand
that those with plenty of money and time and freedom have gotten
comfortable with how-things-are-done.  It's an easy thing to do,
I've done it myself.   But it doesn't serve the long-term interests
of the IETF or the Internet well.

---rsk