Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Don’t We Video Chat More Often?

singularityhub.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–48 of 48 posts

Re: Why Don’t We Video Chat More Often?

#41

Post by lurker19 »

michaelbuckbee wrote: post #39
christopherslee wrote: post #3

because it's very awkward that the camera is not in the same place you are looking. You're looking at the monitor, when the webcam is most often above the monitor. So all the viewer (and vice versa) sees is you looking down. It's not "eye-to-eye" conversation. If you want the other person to feel like they are looking at you, you have to look dead into the camera. But then you miss out on seeing the other person.

In my experience you can mitigate this effect quite a bit by placing the "loopback" video window of yourself (with Skype) directly under the camera at the top of the screen while also full screening the incoming video.

I do not understand. You stare at yourself when you videochat?

Re: Why Don’t We Video Chat More Often?

#42

Post by lurker19 »

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #36

Ok, all the conclusion seem valid, but I choked on this one: "I hope the person doesn’t even answer so that I can leave a voice message with the pertinent information and get on with my day" Why do folks think it is ok to embed important information behind multiple prompts and a dozen key jabs separated by seconds of dead time? Then, its like saying "Here you write this down, slave. I'm to busy to send a freaking tex…

You may have it backwards. Does your voicemail outgoing message include your email address? Do you reply to email promptly? Most do not.

Re: Why Don’t We Video Chat More Often?

#44

Post by jodrellblank »

lurker19 wrote: post #42
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #36

Ok, all the conclusion seem valid, but I choked on this one: "I hope the person doesn’t even answer so that I can leave a voice message with the pertinent information and get on with my day" Why do folks think it is ok to embed important information behind multiple prompts and a dozen key jabs separated by seconds of dead time? Then, its like saying "Here you write this down, slave. I'm to busy to send a freaking tex…

You may have it backwards. Does your voicemail outgoing message include your email address? Do you reply to email promptly? Most do not.

Or why not have voicemail emailed to you?

Re: Why Don’t We Video Chat More Often?

#45

Post by keane »

eftpotrm wrote: post #24

I may be a spectacularly inconsiderate communicator, but for me the answer is multitasking. I can and do do a wide range of tasks while having an audio phone call with people. At home I can do basic housework, prepare meals, wander round for all sorts of things with the phone jammed between by head and my shoulder. It works well. I never have had video chat facilities for work (or needed them really) but I can think…

I agree with you. Video chat as it exists seems to require the full attention of both parties. Like you say, one becomes "tied to the screen". It seems video might be more used if one wasn't tied to the screen.

How can this be done? As Keith writes at Singularity Hub "[…] all too often when making a phone call, I hope the person doesn't even answer so that I can leave a voice message with the pertinent information and get on with my day. With today's video chat, it usually isn't even possible to leave a video message." Why is this not possible?

I think that there are three main formats of conversations (based on speed):

  1. Realtime + Continuous (face-to-face AFK interaction, phone calls)
  2. Realtime + Intersperced (Instant Messaging [AIM/Jabber], SMS)
  3. Not realtime (letters via USPS, typical use of email, posts to blogs)
What is notable is that with video, options exist only for types one and two:

  1. Video chat (as implemented by Skype and GTalk/Gmail)
  2. [doesn't appear to exist]
  3. Video blogging (posting a video to YouTube, emailing your friend the link)
I think people (including Skype) have assumed that realtime video should follow the format of telephone calls - continuous and streaming. This certainly has its place. But what might be more useful would be video IM. In an IM client such as Skype, have a button to record a short message perhaps limited to a total of 30 seconds, just as Twitter limits updates to 140 characters. Send the video and let the recipient watch the video as they are able. Then, the second party can take their time to think of something to say, fix their hair, etc. and respond by recording a short response.

Approaching video this way would remove the initiating parties worry that they are interrupting anything - the recipient only watches their video when they are able and can choose when to respond. It also removes the worry that video means a 'long serious conversation' - instead it can be simply short amusing anecdotes or quick flirtatious quips - what would previously have been expressed through texting/SMS. It lowers the stress of both parties who no longer have to be on-point for an extended period. And it frees both, no longer "tied to the screen".

Re: Why Don’t We Video Chat More Often?

#46

Post by eftpotrm »

keane wrote: post #45
eftpotrm wrote: post #24

I may be a spectacularly inconsiderate communicator, but for me the answer is multitasking. I can and do do a wide range of tasks while having an audio phone call with people. At home I can do basic housework, prepare meals, wander round for all sorts of things with the phone jammed between by head and my shoulder. It works well. I never have had video chat facilities for work (or needed them really) but I can think…

I agree with you. Video chat as it exists seems to require the full attention of both parties. Like you say, one becomes "tied to the screen". It seems video might be more used if one wasn't tied to the screen. How can this be done? As Keith writes at Singularity Hub "[…] all too often when making a phone call, I hope the person doesn't even answer so that I can leave a voice message with the pertinent information an…

Just a little thing, but Windows Live Messenger seems to support leaving video messages for people. I've never used it, but the option is there in the interface.

Re: Why Don’t We Video Chat More Often?

#47

Post by nooneelse »

jodrellblank wrote: post #43

Does anyone here do two offices with projectors and video cameras at one end, to make one big virtual office, as an always-on thing? If so, what's it like? How well does it work?

I'm curious about that sort of thing for offices too. But I'm also curious about a home version.

I've thought that it would be cool to equip the living-room screen (formerly known as the TV) with a camera and connect it with similarly equipped screens in the homes of members of my social network. Obviously a privacy mode would be there, but people in small towns and neighborhoods used to do all sorts of stuff out on their front porches (maybe they still do in places), basically advertising to other people they knew that they are open to some conversation. So there is at least a little reason to think people would turn on a "my available friends live" video channel. I'd like to break down the effects on my social networks which space unnecessarily imposes.

Re: Why Don’t We Video Chat More Often?

#48

Post by fps »

jodrellblank wrote: post #44
lurker19 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may have it backwards. Does your voicemail outgoing message include your email address? Do you reply to email promptly? Most do not.

Or why not have voicemail emailed to you?

Google voice has quite a bit of trouble transcribing the clearest of calls. I've got 170 or so voicemails in my google voice box and maybe 1/4 of them are transcribed well enough that I don't need to listen to the mp3.

My voicemail message tells people to email me if they want to hear back quickly.

Post reply on HN