------ =_NextPart_001_01BDF954.5F27C605
Content-Type: text/plain
You've mis-stated my arguments. The telephone works fine because full
sound IS sufficient for human conversation, even though you can't see
human expressions. Note that this is already a somewhat degraded
conversation from the face-to-face kind, but one people are willing to
put up with when face-to-face discussions are difficult or impossible.
My argument was only that half-duplex makes the conversation even more
difficult than full-duplex. It is not a free optimization -- it has a
cost in terms of difficulty of keeping up a polite non-scripted
conversation. I'm sure some people are willing to put up with the high
degradation in order to get "free" internet phone functionality. I
claim that half-duplex is not as good as full-duplex for most
conversations, even polite conversations.
Lisa
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gregory Alan Bolcer [SMTP:gbolcer@gambetta.ICS.uci.edu]
> Sent: Friday, October 16, 1998 2:43 PM
> To: Tom Whore
> Cc: FoRK@xent.ICS.uci.edu
> Subject: Re: Voice Economics
>
> > Half duplex is a monologue
> > full duplex is a conversation
> >
> > But still and all, voice alone is only a fraction of how and what
> we
> > communicate, or better put it is just one tool we use to express
> > ourselves, most times with out knowing we are using those tools at
> all.
> > Facial ticks, breathing, eye motion, finger twitches.
> >
> > There is still a very long way to go until full-humanplex
> communications
> > are realized over the lines, data or voice.
>
> Sure, but if I believe Lisa's arguements, the telephone would
> never have been invented because you couldn't communicated because
> you can't see facial expressions. My point was solely, sure you
> need those things to communicate, but at what cost? Does every
> single conversation have to include those things? What type of
> support do you need for 1/2 the time?
>
> How does the average person decide whether to write a letter, pick up
> the phone, send an email, etc. With digital media you can now
> broadcast, multicast, pointcast, etc, not everybody needs to do
> everything. What dollar premium are you willing to pay to handle
> full-humanplex communications and do you need it all the time?
>
> Greg
>
------ =_NextPart_001_01BDF954.5F27C605
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
You've mis-stated my = arguments. The telephone works fine because full sound IS = sufficient for human conversation, even though you can't see human = expressions. Note that this is already a somewhat degraded = conversation from the face-to-face kind, but one people are willing to = put up with when face-to-face discussions are difficult or = impossible.
My argument was only = that half-duplex makes the conversation even more difficult than = full-duplex. It is not a free optimization -- it has a cost in = terms of difficulty of keeping up a polite non-scripted = conversation. I'm sure some people are willing to put up with the = high degradation in order to get "free" internet phone = functionality. I claim that half-duplex is not as good as = full-duplex for most conversations, even polite = conversations.
Lisa
-----Original Message-----
From: Gregory Alan Bolcer =
[SMTP:gbolcer@gambetta.ICS.uci.edu]
Sent: Friday, October 16, 1998 2:43 PM
To: Tom Whore
Cc: FoRK@xent.ICS.uci.edu
Subject: =
Re: Voice Economics
> Half duplex is a monologue =
> full duplex is a =
conversation
>
> But still and all, voice =
alone is only a fraction of how and what we
> communicate, or better put =
it is just one tool we use to express
> ourselves, most times with =
out knowing we are using those tools at all.
> Facial ticks, breathing, =
eye motion, finger twitches.
>
> There is still a very long =
way to go until full-humanplex communications
> are realized over the =
lines, data or voice.
Sure, but if I believe Lisa's =
arguements, the telephone would
never have been invented because you =
couldn't communicated because
you can't see facial =
expressions. My point was solely, sure you
need those things to communicate, but =
at what cost? Does every
single conversation have to include =
those things? What type of
support do you need for 1/2 the =
time?
How does the average person decide =
whether to write a letter, pick up
the phone, send an email, etc. =
With digital media you can now
broadcast, multicast, pointcast, etc, =
not everybody needs to do
everything. What dollar premium =
are you willing to pay to handle
full-humanplex communications and do =
you need it all the time?
Greg