Re: Bandwith and personal vulnerablity

Jonathan Day (jonathan.day@umist.ac.uk)
Thu, 29 Feb 1996 09:33:18 +0000


Daniel E. Gross wrote:
> Brian McGugan wrote:
> > 'still pictures' and 'no video' are meant to represent the person they wish
> > that they were, and/or the person they wish to convey to the electronic
> > world...
> Not at all. My only connection living in far northern Wisconsin is a lousy
> one. I am forced to display a still, and possibly update it once every few
> minutes or when expression changes due to the fact that my packets just won't
> get out. I very often can see nothing more than shaded blocks when on a
> reflector. Motion video presents a real problem to me.

Maybe it's a little of each. I know plenty of people who are camera-shy, who
would be happier in something closer to Worlds Chat. However, I also know from
past experience that poor links savagely affect the usefulness of the net.

I know that the animation software exists to satisfy the first group, but it
seems to need high-end workstations and those don't exactly litter the landscape.

For the latter, is it possible to get hold of a buffer of some kind? Except for
broadcast stations, such as NASA, people don't usually talk non-stop for long
periods of time. If it's possible to have a program which buffers the input, then
feeds the signal over a relatively low-speed link, you might be able to avoid the
problem. It'd mean that it'd look more like that communications setup in 2001, than
videoconferencing, but maybe that'd be good enough.