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

A theory of Zoom fatigue

theconvivialsociety.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 213 posts

Re: A theory of Zoom fatigue

#191

Post by munificent »

lisper wrote: post #164
notacoward wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that can work well, as long as people also adopt the military/aviation habit of speaking crisply and not rambling on to hog the channel until they're absolutely sure they've emptied themselves of every possible thought they could ever have on the matter. Like I just did with every word after "rambling on". ;)

Yeah, this. The experience with overseas calls I was referring to was talking to my then-girlfriend who was spending a year studying in France. Saying "over" all the time is not very romantic.

Her: I miss you so much, your touch, your smell. I can't wait to hold you in my arms and gaze into your eyes.

You: Copy.

Re: A theory of Zoom fatigue

#192

Post by stjohnswarts »

dylan604 wrote: post #40
lostdog wrote: post #18

Lots of normal things about human interaction are broken in Zoom meetings. * You can't have a normal conversation with that much delay. Every time you talk you're probably interrupting someone, and that starts to wear on you. * You can't have any side chats with your neighbors before and after the meeting, making everyone seem less like a person. * You can't tell who's looking at you, so you always feel like you have…

So why the fixation on a video call? I'm probably just an old curmudgeon, but to me the benefits do not out weigh the oddities being discussed. Everyone wearing their pieces of flair with their "personalized" backgrounds are tiresome. I can see the benefits of a screen share/presentation, but I really don't need to see the other people involved. I don't care about tone of voice. I get sarcasm. For the people that don…

I agree 100%, voice is fine for communication. The video should only be deployed for presentations, graphs, and other visual media that is necessary to get your point across. Facetime is usless unless it's with the parentals every couple of months.

Re: A theory of Zoom fatigue

#193

Post by ken »

qppo wrote: post #54
ken wrote: post #33

I’m surprised this didn’t mention the elephant in the room: the audio quality is terrible. I simply can’t hear half of what is said, even at full volume in a quiet room. Either I ask for repetition all the time (and walk over whatever the next person said), or I assume it from context and let it go. Even when I can pick up all the sounds, it’s so different from hearing voice in person that I have to concentrate just…

The only thing really terrible is their (lack of) echo cancellation. Otherwise I'm about 90% sure it's just off the shelf OPUS with next to no DSP on top. It's not that bad on its own. What is terrible is audio hardware on laptops. MacBooks are alright, but just $50 on a headset will go a long ways to solving your problems. Consumers haven't given a shit about audio fidelity for decades honestly, it's just showing to…

So the solution is "convince all of my (unemployed) friends to spend $50 on something which has more value to me than to them"?

Assuming that does solve it, I'd say a solution is known, but I wouldn't call it "solved". That's like a "nobody needs DropBox" type of "solved problem".

Re: A theory of Zoom fatigue

#194

Post by stjohnswarts »

bluGill wrote: post #174
dylan604 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why the fixation on a video call? I'm probably just an old curmudgeon, but to me the benefits do not out weigh the oddities being discussed. Everyone wearing their pieces of flair with their "personalized" backgrounds are tiresome. I can see the benefits of a screen share/presentation, but I really don't need to see the other people involved. I don't care about tone of voice. I get sarcasm. For the people that don…

Different people think different. Some people would be happy with written only. Some people like audio even though it is slower. Some people need to see other people. It is all a compromise to get different people to work together. Sometimes that means that I use mediums of communication that don't work well for me.

It seems like a "compromise" that is entirely in favor of the visual people though.

Re: A theory of Zoom fatigue

#195

Post by stjohnswarts »

ken wrote: post #33

I’m surprised this didn’t mention the elephant in the room: the audio quality is terrible. I simply can’t hear half of what is said, even at full volume in a quiet room. Either I ask for repetition all the time (and walk over whatever the next person said), or I assume it from context and let it go. Even when I can pick up all the sounds, it’s so different from hearing voice in person that I have to concentrate just…

I have issues with some peers who have thick accents who normally in the office I have zero problems understanding. It does get tiring. It's no ones fault other than the audio tossing away information though. I hate having to ask people to repeat themselves and saying "the audio is kind of crappy today".

Re: A theory of Zoom fatigue

#196

Post by munificent »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #66
justincormack wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn’t due to potential echo but you can set this up yourself with most headsets or with a mic and mixer; you need to with headphones that shut out your voice or you will shout to compensate.

I tend to put my headphones on only halfway, also to catch anything going on in the background (noise cancelling headphones + my back is to the bedroom door).

I have open back headphones that I use at home (can't use at the office because too much sound bleed), and they are great for video calls because of this since they let in the sound of my own voice.

Re: A theory of Zoom fatigue

#197

Post by intopieces »

asdff wrote: post #189
slimed wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You miss them. Not their faces.

My personal happiness plummeted, anecdotally, when my coworkers started dropping the video feed one by one. It was surprising, but noticeable and significant.

Same for me. There's just little things about interacting with a person face to face, personality aspects like how they express themselves: posture, eye movement, facial expression even. They just add to the interestingness of the work.

Re: A theory of Zoom fatigue

#198

Post by RHSeeger »

lwhsiao wrote: post #72
osdiab wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anyone have suggestions for the lowest latency VoIP providers?

Mumble and the like are quite low latency if you have a well positioned server. Even though it's designed for gaming, it makes for great group chat.

At least in part, it depends on what the program prioritizes. Mumbles prioritizes latency over sound quality. You start to sound bad sooner, but it's more snappy. For most gaming, that's the right choice to make. For normal phone conversations, you might value sound quality more.

Re: A theory of Zoom fatigue

#199

Post by bluGill »

stjohnswarts wrote: post #194
bluGill wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Different people think different. Some people would be happy with written only. Some people like audio even though it is slower. Some people need to see other people. It is all a compromise to get different people to work together. Sometimes that means that I use mediums of communication that don't work well for me.

It seems like a "compromise" that is entirely in favor of the visual people though.

Email is a compromise to the readers. It works out more or less. There is no good answer but if you understand it exists you can work with it. Sometimes that means you have to work hard in a medium you don't like, other times you can suggest yours is better and win.

Re: A theory of Zoom fatigue

#200

Post by qppo »

ken wrote: post #193
qppo wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing really terrible is their (lack of) echo cancellation. Otherwise I'm about 90% sure it's just off the shelf OPUS with next to no DSP on top. It's not that bad on its own. What is terrible is audio hardware on laptops. MacBooks are alright, but just $50 on a headset will go a long ways to solving your problems. Consumers haven't given a shit about audio fidelity for decades honestly, it's just showing to…

So the solution is "convince all of my (unemployed) friends to spend $50 on something which has more value to me than to them"? Assuming that does solve it, I'd say a solution is known , but I wouldn't call it "solved". That's like a "nobody needs DropBox" type of "solved problem".

Well they have value in hearing others and being heard, I'd assume. All my friends have their own mics because we couldn't understand eachother otherwise, and we don't have problems with fidelity. My coworkers are a different story, because consumers rarely listen to integrated microphones before they purchase a device (bluetooth earbuds are absolutely terrible about this, fwiw). Who's at fault, the company for cheaping out, or the consumer for not caring enough to find out if they company cheaped out?

The technical problem is solved. The economics problem of getting people to value the solution and marketing problem of educating about it is still open.

Regardless, this isn't a problem to be solved by software. It's a consumer electronics problem.

Post reply on HN