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

Zoom Fatigue Is Real, According to Brain Scans

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 130 posts

Re: Zoom Fatigue Is Real, According to Brain Scans

#41

Post by tomjakubowski »

15457345234 wrote: post #30
Gigachad wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I absolutely hate calls. WFH works well when you just need to grind out something solo, but it’s awful to communicate. Personally I go in the office 1-2 days a week. If you want to talk to me, do it in person those days. If you add me to some 10 person video call. I’m just going to zone out.

I absolutely love calls, you don't have to type and you have the other person's (relatively) undivided attention. Plus cajoling, browbeating and instigating techniques work better and if called out you can put things down to 'tonal misunderstanding.' Also a lot of people these days can't truly understand written content because they don't grasp nuance and only interpret things literally. When you actually talk to the…

> a lot of people these days can't truly understand written content

It's a two way street. A lot of people are terrible at writing to communicate, especially in a time-sensitive context like Slack, and we remote workers are having to do a lot more written communication than when we were in the office.

US national reading comprehension test scores have been flat, more or less, since 1992. https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/highlights/reading/2022/

Re: Zoom Fatigue Is Real, According to Brain Scans

#42

Post by 15457345234 »

kccqzy wrote: post #34
15457345234 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I absolutely love calls, you don't have to type and you have the other person's (relatively) undivided attention. Plus cajoling, browbeating and instigating techniques work better and if called out you can put things down to 'tonal misunderstanding.' Also a lot of people these days can't truly understand written content because they don't grasp nuance and only interpret things literally. When you actually talk to the…

You know you can just have an in-person meeting. You also don't have to type and you also have the other person's undivided attention (perhaps even more so).

I don't like to move, I like to sit at my desk and summon

Re: Zoom Fatigue Is Real, According to Brain Scans

#43

Post by tayo42 »

eropple wrote: post #24

The biggest thing that leads to this, I think, is bad audio. Listening to shitty scratchy laptop microphones -- or even the comparatively-excellent Apple array microphones -- is deeply fatiguing. I notice a distinct difference in energy expended when I'm on a call with people who have low/zero background noise and decent-quality microphones, and others have noted that about me (as I'm also an audio engineer in my spa…

I don't understand why companies don't invest in this. It doesn't seem that expensive to provide headsets, I'm already getting an expensive MacBook.

Re: Zoom Fatigue Is Real, According to Brain Scans

#44

Post by cassianoleal »

15457345234 wrote: post #30
Gigachad wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I absolutely hate calls. WFH works well when you just need to grind out something solo, but it’s awful to communicate. Personally I go in the office 1-2 days a week. If you want to talk to me, do it in person those days. If you add me to some 10 person video call. I’m just going to zone out.

I absolutely love calls, you don't have to type and you have the other person's (relatively) undivided attention. Plus cajoling, browbeating and instigating techniques work better and if called out you can put things down to 'tonal misunderstanding.' Also a lot of people these days can't truly understand written content because they don't grasp nuance and only interpret things literally. When you actually talk to the…

> a lot of people these days can't truly understand written content because they don't grasp nuance and only interpret things literally.

There seems to be a disconnect between parts of this sentence. "Can't understend written content" because they "interpret things literally."

Why wouldn't they? If you have something to say, say it - or, in this case, write it.

Why leave things open to interpretation?

Furthermore, why not just say things literally in a video call or in-person meeting as well? Surely the only possibility is for less confusion this way.

Re: Zoom Fatigue Is Real, According to Brain Scans

#45

Post by OkayPhysicist »

eropple wrote: post #24

The biggest thing that leads to this, I think, is bad audio. Listening to shitty scratchy laptop microphones -- or even the comparatively-excellent Apple array microphones -- is deeply fatiguing. I notice a distinct difference in energy expended when I'm on a call with people who have low/zero background noise and decent-quality microphones, and others have noted that about me (as I'm also an audio engineer in my spa…

No one should be using built in audio IO on their laptops. A proper headset, with a relatively nice attached mic should be considered minimum viable equipment for VoIP calls, and companies should as such supply them, just like they do laptops.

Re: Zoom Fatigue Is Real, According to Brain Scans

#47

Post by 15457345234 »

cassianoleal wrote: post #44
15457345234 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I absolutely love calls, you don't have to type and you have the other person's (relatively) undivided attention. Plus cajoling, browbeating and instigating techniques work better and if called out you can put things down to 'tonal misunderstanding.' Also a lot of people these days can't truly understand written content because they don't grasp nuance and only interpret things literally. When you actually talk to the…

> a lot of people these days can't truly understand written content because they don't grasp nuance and only interpret things literally. There seems to be a disconnect between parts of this sentence. "Can't understend written content" because they "interpret things literally." Why wouldn't they? If you have something to say, say it - or, in this case, write it. Why leave things open to interpretation? Furthermore, wh…

Because unless you take half an hour to write 500 words you're always leaving things open to interpretation. A huge part of human communication is interpretation and inference.

When you have a verbal communication people bring up things they don't understand in realtime and you correct as you go so that, by the end of the conversation, a mutual understanding has been reached.

In writing - especially if you're sending emails - people are often reluctant to come back for more info as they think it'll make them look dumb, plus there's the 'inertia' factor plus the factor of not knowing whether you'll get a timely reply.

Re: Zoom Fatigue Is Real, According to Brain Scans

#48

Post by booleandilemma »

gumballindie wrote: post #28

Stop using zoom and stop holding endless meetings.

Unfortunately my present manager loves meetings. The worst part is after we get through the agenda he starts rambling about whatever topic is on his mind, like one of those old people you see at the supermarket who talk to the cashier and who are in obvious need of social interaction. The man doesn't know how to end a meeting.

Re: Zoom Fatigue Is Real, According to Brain Scans

#49

Post by teaearlgraycold »

fullshark wrote: post #15

The truth is a modern office is based on hacking fundamental components of humans and their desire for tribal membership and signals + rewards there of. The tricks don't work as well over a zoom call.

Too bad most of us need to work to live. Might as well take the lesser of two evils.

Re: Zoom Fatigue Is Real, According to Brain Scans

#50

Post by aaronscott »

eropple wrote: post #24

The biggest thing that leads to this, I think, is bad audio. Listening to shitty scratchy laptop microphones -- or even the comparatively-excellent Apple array microphones -- is deeply fatiguing. I notice a distinct difference in energy expended when I'm on a call with people who have low/zero background noise and decent-quality microphones, and others have noted that about me (as I'm also an audio engineer in my spa…

During a job interview I was asked to teach something off the cuff. There were two interviewers in the meeting, so I decided to show the difference that a good mic with good placement can have on call quality. Switched from my nice mic that was one shaka[0] away, to the laptop mic that was about two arm lengths away (maybe 8 shaka’s). They were shocked at the difference and one asked “is that what I sound like right now?”

I went on to discuss how sound intensity is inverse to the square of the distance, so double the mic distance and it’s 1/4 the intensity. So the distant mic was picking up ~1/64th the volume. When there isn’t much of a difference between my voice and room echoes it becomes hard to listen to.

They started a discussion about how much it would cost to outfit everyone with external mics after that haha. For anyone wondering, even a cheap lapel or broadcast mic that’s close to your face will sound much better than a distant laptop, due to the comparative volume of your voice verses the environment.

[0] One shaka, or one “hell yeah” is a unit of measure an audio engineer shared with me once. Extend your thumb and pinky, and get your mic about that far from your mouth for good sound. One or two shaka’s is generally very good.

Post reply on HN