[OT]Why do you trust computers?

On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 13:48:05 -0400, Paul wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 11:46:24 -0400, Paul wrote:

I've received a request from a new doctor to do one of
these video phone calls (just yesterday). The dude is
"working from home" and isn't even at the hospital these days.
His secretary said "when your time comes, we don't know where he'll be".
If things are sane at the hospital, he'll still be working
at home, but if some "all hands" call goes out, he'll have to
go back to work. He's not in emerg, so doesn't have to
hang out there.

Same comments about the rash thing. A 640x480 video call
is a hell of a way to do an exam.

I haven't had a need to shop for a web cam lately, but can you still get a
640x480 model or did they disappear from store shelves around 1992?


My situation is constrained by upload bandwidth.

Good point.

My expectation is 640x480 will fit into the envelope,
and high res, won't.

Gotcha. I was thinking low end cameras these days must be capable of at
least 720p, while the upper end would be 4k or 8k, and the bulk would still
in the middle at 1080p. Even if you had any of those, a small upload pipe
would be the limiting factor. Things could be worse, though. You could be
constrained to 320x240 or even 240x160. I'm taking those from memory,
thinking back 20 years to when I was a network designer and I had to worry
about handset bandwidth.

Char Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 13:48:05 -0400, Paul wrote:

Char Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 11:46:24 -0400, Paul wrote:

I've received a request from a new doctor to do one of
these video phone calls (just yesterday). The dude is
"working from home" and isn't even at the hospital these days.
His secretary said "when your time comes, we don't know where he'll be".
If things are sane at the hospital, he'll still be working
at home, but if some "all hands" call goes out, he'll have to
go back to work. He's not in emerg, so doesn't have to
hang out there.

Same comments about the rash thing. A 640x480 video call
is a hell of a way to do an exam.
I haven't had a need to shop for a web cam lately, but can you still get a
640x480 model or did they disappear from store shelves around 1992?

My situation is constrained by upload bandwidth.

Good point.

My expectation is 640x480 will fit into the envelope,
and high res, won't.

Gotcha. I was thinking low end cameras these days must be capable of at
least 720p, while the upper end would be 4k or 8k, and the bulk would still
in the middle at 1080p. Even if you had any of those, a small upload pipe
would be the limiting factor. Things could be worse, though. You could be
constrained to 320x240 or even 240x160. I'm taking those from memory,
thinking back 20 years to when I was a network designer and I had to worry
about handset bandwidth.


Well, I did my "test call" and what a disappointment.

The session ran at around 100Kbit/sec (10% of max uplink rate).

The window with the video might have been 320x240.

Party, like it's 1999...

I would think a regular phone call would do as much good.

Paul

On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 at 10:45:00, Mayayana
wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| Yesterday I had a call from my doctor's office to say
| that my annual physical is cancelled but would I like a Zoom
| checkup? It's especially good for problems like high blood
| pressure. Huh?! How absurd. Zoom is a phone call with a
| picture, not a checkup.
|
| Agreed, but at least they're offering something; in the circumstances,
| what would you do? (I keep hearing mention of Zoom - is it like Skype,
| but MS-independent? Maybe not involving a server?) OK, not as good as a
| face-to-face checkup, but you could still show them (depending on the
| quality of your webcam) things like a rash.

I don't see it as offering something. I had an appt for a
yearly physical. Lots of tests. They didn't even suggest
I go to the hospital to have the blood tests. They were
just offering that I could look at my doctor on a screen.
I see it as a way to bill for an appt without having the

Ah, of course: money. I hadn't even thought of that aspect.

appt. Yes, I could show her a rash. But I don't have a
rash. So Zoom would be no better than a phone call,
except that she probably bills for the former as a full appt
and for the latter as a phone consultation.

Since I wasn't thinking of the charging aspect, I was just seeing it as
it being better than nothing, if you're due an annual checkup. If you're
paying for it, I can see that you'd be a bit miffed to have to pay the
same for less.
[]
Zoom is done by a program you download. Then you
need a webcam and microphone. It's like video

So doesn't need a server (like I understand Skype does)?

conferencing. You join a group chat. People are
even doing it on phones, which is silly, because they
could have a conference call. I don't know if Skype
can do conference calls. I've only seen it used for
direct phone calls.

I've seen an "invite person X" button on-screen, though I've never
actually done a three-way. (The person I Skype with most often doesn't
even use the video, unless she wants me to help components of a food
shipment she's received or something similar.)


--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

You know what the big secret about posh people is? Most of them are lovely.
- Richard Osman, RT 2016/7/9-15

On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 at 11:17:47, Char Jackson wrote:
[]
I haven't had a need to shop for a web cam lately, but can you still get a
640x480 model or did they disappear from store shelves around 1992?

I think you still can, at the really bottom end of the price range.
Sometime last year, my blind friend wanted one, but wasn't bothered
about quality. Looking at the box as I've just done, I eventually found
(after working my way through "Up to 7.1 Mega pixels resolution upgrade
function", "3200 × 2400(insert pixel)" [I presume that's Chinese for
"interpolated"] and so on), "hardware pixels 480K". Not sure what that
will be - 640×480 is 307200 - but it's the same ballpark. After all, for
three quid 20 (postage free), getting ... well, twenty years ago the
thought of getting an SD TV camera for three quid! (Or even many times
that. And in that size!) It actually produced good results, and is I
think a good piece of kit: metal body, 6 LEDs, manual focus.
(Unfortunately, I couldn't get it to work _consistently_ under Windows
10, though I did at least once. It's fine on 7. We distress-purchased
one - inferior quality, but was fine under 10 - at the local Wilkinsons.
No LEDs, I think inferior and fixed-focus lens.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

You know what the big secret about posh people is? Most of them are lovely.
- Richard Osman, RT 2016/7/9-15

On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 20:58:41 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

On Thu, 26 Mar 2020 at 11:17:47, Char Jackson wrote:
[]
I haven't had a need to shop for a web cam lately, but can you still get a
640x480 model or did they disappear from store shelves around 1992?

I think you still can, at the really bottom end of the price range.
Sometime last year, my blind friend wanted one, but wasn't bothered
about quality. Looking at the box as I've just done, I eventually found
(after working my way through "Up to 7.1 Mega pixels resolution upgrade
function", "3200 × 2400(insert pixel)" [I presume that's Chinese for
"interpolated"] and so on), "hardware pixels 480K". Not sure what that
will be - 640×480 is 307200 - but it's the same ballpark. After all, for
three quid 20 (postage free), getting ... well, twenty years ago the
thought of getting an SD TV camera for three quid! (Or even many times
that. And in that size!) It actually produced good results, and is I
think a good piece of kit: metal body, 6 LEDs, manual focus.
(Unfortunately, I couldn't get it to work _consistently_ under Windows
10, though I did at least once. It's fine on 7. We distress-purchased
one - inferior quality, but was fine under 10 - at the local Wilkinsons.
No LEDs, I think inferior and fixed-focus lens.)

Thanks, John. I'm glad you found a solution that worked.

In article , Char Jackson
wrote:

I haven't had a need to shop for a web cam lately, but can you still get a
640x480 model or did they disappear from store shelves around 1992?

you'd be lucky to get *any* webcam lately because they're backordered
pretty much everywhere.

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| Zoom is done by a program you download. Then you
| need a webcam and microphone. It's like video
|
| So doesn't need a server (like I understand Skype does)?
|

I'm not the one to ask about that. I've never
used it. I'm assuming it runs through a Zoom
server that each person logs into by "joining"
a group, but I really don't know.

Mayayana wrote:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| Yesterday I had a call from my doctor's office to say
| that my annual physical is cancelled but would I like a Zoom
| checkup? It's especially good for problems like high blood
| pressure. Huh?! How absurd. Zoom is a phone call with a
| picture, not a checkup.
|
| Agreed, but at least they're offering something; in the circumstances,
| what would you do? (I keep hearing mention of Zoom - is it like Skype,
| but MS-independent? Maybe not involving a server?) OK, not as good as a
| face-to-face checkup, but you could still show them (depending on the
| quality of your webcam) things like a rash.

I don't see it as offering something. I had an appt for a
yearly physical. Lots of tests. They didn't even suggest
I go to the hospital to have the blood tests.

Be a little reasonable. Health services all over the world are at crisis
point. A zoom appointment is better than a cancellation, right?

They were
just offering that I could look at my doctor on a screen.
I see it as a way to bill for an appt without having the
appt. Yes, I could show her a rash. But I don't have a
rash. So Zoom would be no better than a phone call,
except that she probably bills for the former as a full appt
and for the latter as a phone consultation.

In a world without medical insurance the question of money is immaterial.
Maybe the doc is doing it for yours and hers safety. Did you think about
that?

Psychotherapists are doing the same thing. But physical
proximity and body language count for something. You
can't get that on Zoom. You can just get a low quality
image of a person's face, usually a bit choppy.

It doesn't sound like you've used Zoom or the like recently. They are much,
much better then you suggest. High res and low latency. I regularly have
zoom and Teams meetings (more so it the last couple of weeks) and the
personal interaction is very similar to being there in person. When the
alternative is to not have the meeting/appointment then video chat is
infinite % better.

"Chris" wrote

| I don't see it as offering something. I had an appt for a
| yearly physical. Lots of tests. They didn't even suggest
| I go to the hospital to have the blood tests.
|
| Be a little reasonable. Health services all over the world are at crisis
| point. A zoom appointment is better than a cancellation, right?
|

You seem to only pipe up to say that no one
should be critical due to the crisis. We should stay home,
shut up, and behave. I propose that such an unthinking
herd mentality is part of the problem. Incompetent
bureaucracies, panic, selfishness and stupidity don't
stop in a crisis.

People need to actually think. Don't
avoid masks just because the authorities say we don't
need them, for example. They're only trying to keep people
calm and deal with a shortage of masks. Earlier you were
saying that we should all obey the authorities and stay
home. What about the store clerks,
kitchen workers, manicurists, housecleaners, laborers,
who don't have a month's rent in the bank? Trump is
offering them $1,200, which may take up to 4 months to
arrive. What are you going to tell them when they break
down your door for food?

We're dangerously close to mass civil unrest if people
are not provided with food and shelter; if some provision
isn't made to let more people work. Yet the only talk
is about how far away we should be from others in the
supermarket. We're obsessed with 1st world inconveniences
as we descend, unnoticed, into 3rd world chaos. The upper
classes simply have no experience of what it means to live
on the edge. They're busy heading for the Hamptons and
wondering if they packed enough ice cream.

The Zoom appt is certainly a less critical issue, but there's
still no reason to just unthinkingly go along with ninny-brained
fads. A Zoom appt is not better than a cancellation. A
Zoom physical achieves nothing at all. We're talking about
an appt intended to physically inspect my physical body!
It's routine to take blood samples for tests. The doctor could
have instructed me to go for those tests and then have a
phone call. Or we could just postpone the appt. Instead
she's suggesting a pretense, high on tech, low on common
sense. If I have a problem I'll call on the phone.

But if a Zoom checkup seems sensible to you then
I guess you're lucky. At least you can enjoy keyboard sex
with Cortana while you sit at home during the crisis.
Just as good, right?

| I see it as a way to bill for an appt without having the
| appt. Yes, I could show her a rash. But I don't have a
| rash. So Zoom would be no better than a phone call,
| except that she probably bills for the former as a full appt
| and for the latter as a phone consultation.
|
| In a world without medical insurance the question of money is immaterial.
| Maybe the doc is doing it for yours and hers safety. Did you think about
| that?
|

You're making several, let's say "rash", assumptions
there. I have insurance. Money is not immaterial. What
are you on about? You've chosen to defend a dubious
position and now you're holding onto it like a yapping dog
with an article of clothing in its mouth.

If the doctor has a Zoom appt she can charge my insurance.
Obviously the idea of not meeting physically is for everyone's
safety. That's a given. The idea of meeting not physically
is the problem. She's trying to keep the business
going without change, even though it's not possible to
do that. I'm a carpenter. What if I called you to say I
can't go fix your deck right now, but I'd be happy to do
a Zoom consultation about it? And what if I then sent
you a bill for "deck repair"?

| It doesn't sound like you've used Zoom or the like recently. They are
much,
| much better then you suggest. High res and low latency. I regularly have
| zoom and Teams meetings (more so it the last couple of weeks) and the
| personal interaction is very similar to being there in person. When the
| alternative is to not have the meeting/appointment then video chat is
| infinite % better.
|
That makes sense for a business meeting. You don't really
need to see each other. In most cases it could be done just as
well on a conference call. The video aspect is just high tech
pizzazz. (In fact, people I know who regularly have business
meetings often complain that they're mostly a waste of time;
a chance for top dogs to hold forth with posing while the pack
is forced to listen.)

Not all communication scenarios are business meetings. I don't
know when you last went outside, but there's a very big difference
between physical proximity and phone calls. Adding video doesn't
do much to change that. I also worry that the temporary measures
might bleed over into the future. So psychotherapy via Zoom
becomes the norm while in-person becomes a special case. Or
doctors visits become a visit with a computer followed by a
Zoom hi/bye with a doctor. (My doctor is already spending most
of her time staring at a laptop, checking off the latest fads:
blood pressure? check. cholesterol? check. colonoscopy?
check. Did you ever wonder why colonoscopies are the best
thing since sliced bread, while checks for artery clogging are
rare? It's because treating colon cancer costs insurance
companies a massive amount of money, on average. So it's
worth it to them to blow $2,500 on a test you probably don't
need. Clogged arteries, on the other hand, are more expensive
to inspect and if you get them there's a good chance you'll
just drop dead. So you're tested for the problem you probably
don't have instead of the one that you may very well have,
because it's less costly. Did you think doctors and insurance
companies are all laboring for free?)

I would suggest trying a simple practice: Take note of your
opinions and conclusions. Look at them. Analyze their genesis.
"Why do I believe x? Did I hear it? Who told me? Are they
believable? Did I come to that conclusion myself? Based on
what?" What emotional motive is causing you to feel so
irritated by my statements that you feel you must counter
them, even if it means resorting to irrational arguments? What
inernal; doubt are you sweeping under the rug with your
arguments? In other words, methinks the Zoomist sheltering
in place doth protest too much.

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

People need to actually think. Don't
avoid masks just because the authorities say we don't
need them, for example. They're only trying to keep people
calm and deal with a shortage of masks.

healthy people do not need masks.

doctors and nurses do, and there aren't enough for *them*.

Earlier you were
saying that we should all obey the authorities and stay
home. What about the store clerks,
kitchen workers, manicurists, housecleaners, laborers,
who don't have a month's rent in the bank? Trump is
offering them $1,200, which may take up to 4 months to
arrive. What are you going to tell them when they break
down your door for food?

coke or pepsi?

The Zoom appt is certainly a less critical issue, but there's
still no reason to just unthinkingly go along with ninny-brained
fads.

videoconferencing is not a fad, certainly not after this, where
companies will realize just how much can be done remotely and their
excuses that it wouldn't work were bull****.

A Zoom appt is not better than a cancellation. A
Zoom physical achieves nothing at all.

it's obviously not as good as an in-person physical, but to claim it's
worthless is simply false.

We're talking about
an appt intended to physically inspect my physical body!
It's routine to take blood samples for tests. The doctor could
have instructed me to go for those tests and then have a
phone call. Or we could just postpone the appt. Instead
she's suggesting a pretense, high on tech, low on common
sense. If I have a problem I'll call on the phone.

there's quite a bit that can be done via a video call, other than lab
samples, some of which could be done at home and sent in, such as
urine.


If the doctor has a Zoom appt she can charge my insurance.
Obviously the idea of not meeting physically is for everyone's
safety. That's a given. The idea of meeting not physically
is the problem. She's trying to keep the business
going without change, even though it's not possible to
do that. I'm a carpenter. What if I called you to say I
can't go fix your deck right now, but I'd be happy to do
a Zoom consultation about it? And what if I then sent
you a bill for "deck repair"?

what if your real estate agent called you about a house and offered to
show it to you via an app?

real estate transactions are becoming virtual. nobody wants random
people in their house or to go into a random house anymore due to
covid19 risks.

"Mayayana" on Thu, 26 Mar 2020 17:40:38
-0400 typed in alt.windows7.general the following:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| Zoom is done by a program you download. Then you
| need a webcam and microphone. It's like video
|
| So doesn't need a server (like I understand Skype does)?
|

I'm not the one to ask about that. I've never
used it. I'm assuming it runs through a Zoom
server that each person logs into by "joining"
a group, but I really don't know.

And it phones home to China, "free of charge."

--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?

In article , pyotr
filipivich wrote:

I'm not the one to ask about that. I've never
used it. I'm assuming it runs through a Zoom
server that each person logs into by "joining"
a group, but I really don't know.

And it phones home to China, "free of charge."

actually, facebook.

"pyotr filipivich" wrote

| I'm not the one to ask about that. I've never
| used it. I'm assuming it runs through a Zoom
| server that each person logs into by "joining"
| a group, but I really don't know.
|
| And it phones home to China, "free of charge."

Funny you should mention that.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/k...cebook-account

In article , Mayayana
wrote:

| I'm not the one to ask about that. I've never
| used it. I'm assuming it runs through a Zoom
| server that each person logs into by "joining"
| a group, but I really don't know.
|
| And it phones home to China, "free of charge."

Funny you should mention that.


https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/k...a-to-facebook-
even-if-you-dont-have-a-facebook-account

it's not just zoom and not just on ios.

a *lot* of apps on multiple platforms along with websites send data to
facebook and many other tracking companies.

On Fri, 27 Mar 2020 at 08:23:51, Chris wrote:
[]
Be a little reasonable. Health services all over the world are at crisis
point. A zoom appointment is better than a cancellation, right?

I don't think Mayayana has "got" the crisis, judging by his reply rant.
[]
It doesn't sound like you've used Zoom or the like recently. They are much,
much better then you suggest. High res and low latency. I regularly have
zoom and Teams meetings (more so it the last couple of weeks) and the
personal interaction is very similar to being there in person. When the
alternative is to not have the meeting/appointment then video chat is
infinite % better.

I've been surprised recently to see some choirs/groups/orchestras doing
virtual performances; whether Zoom or something else, the latency
problem must have been mostly cracked for that sort of thing to be even
possible.


--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"Farc gorillas who live in the plains of the undies ..." - automatic
subtitling seen on BBC one o'clock news, 2016-8-25, by Cynthia Hollingworth.