Also having a webcast would be even better, though. Combine a webcast and, say, an IRC room, and you create a chance for the people online to discuss the speeches as they happen, fostering a community feel.
(In TransVision 06, we had that, and used a video projector to broadcast the IRC discussion to one of the walls in the room where the actual presentation was held. That led to some interactivity between the online participants and the people physical present, as comments originally made in IRC made their way to the physical world. We also included questions from online participants in the questions & answers sections of the talks.
Yeah, we had that at TransVision′06, but I wouldn’t hold it as a high priority to have it at Singularity Summits.
I think the first and foremost goal of Singularity Summits needs to be outreach, i.e. getting smart people outside of this community to familiarize themselves with what we have to say. Things need to be optimized for that goal, giving a good impression to e.g. smart mainstream CEOs who aren’t familiar with this stuff yet.
I would leave out webcast even for such a small reason that all of the participants-we-want-to-impress might not like the feeling of being continuously filmed while sitting in the audience. It easily makes people feel uncomfortable and not in control.
Another reason is that insofar as there are tradeoffs between what the organizers spend attention on and what not, webcast should be very low on the list of priorities. A live webcast can turn out to be quite a hassle to run smoothly.
In general, I get a negative vibe from people asking for webcast and videos becoming available sooner than later. I view these things as unnecessary luxuries-for-the-insiders, and would hope people in this community manage to instead focus on things that matter (like making the Summit a positive experience for first-timers to these topics). I doubt we’ll lose important information if there’s no webcast or if it takes a while for the videos to become available (personally, I haven’t even bothered to watch the earlier videos, since I expect people to be saying the same things they have written online etc.).
Even if it was mostly a luxury-for-the-insiders—which I’m not convinced it’d necessarily have to be: the event has lots of big-name participants, and with a bit of advertising, you might get a big crowd of watchers who weren’t usually into the Singularity—that doesn’t make it worthless or something that doesn’t matter. People are emotional creatures, and tend to invest more strongly into things or communities they have an emotional attachment to. Creating a feeling of community around the people following the webcast will help build those emotional bonds.
It’s true that some of the audience members might not like being filmed, though. But that has an easy answer: film only the speeches, not the question & answer sessions.
The resources of the organisers are limited, true, and I agree that this isn’t anywhere near the number one priority. It’s up to them to determine whether or not they have the resources for it—but I do want them to be aware of the potential upsides of a webcast they might not have considered.
I view these things as unnecessary luxuries-for-the-insiders, and would hope people in this community manage to instead focus on things that matter (like making the Summit a positive experience for first-timers to these topics).
Having videos available might be a positive experience for first-timers to the website.
Also having a webcast would be even better, though. Combine a webcast and, say, an IRC room, and you create a chance for the people online to discuss the speeches as they happen, fostering a community feel.
(In TransVision 06, we had that, and used a video projector to broadcast the IRC discussion to one of the walls in the room where the actual presentation was held. That led to some interactivity between the online participants and the people physical present, as comments originally made in IRC made their way to the physical world. We also included questions from online participants in the questions & answers sections of the talks.
Yeah, we had that at TransVision′06, but I wouldn’t hold it as a high priority to have it at Singularity Summits.
I think the first and foremost goal of Singularity Summits needs to be outreach, i.e. getting smart people outside of this community to familiarize themselves with what we have to say. Things need to be optimized for that goal, giving a good impression to e.g. smart mainstream CEOs who aren’t familiar with this stuff yet.
I would leave out webcast even for such a small reason that all of the participants-we-want-to-impress might not like the feeling of being continuously filmed while sitting in the audience. It easily makes people feel uncomfortable and not in control.
Another reason is that insofar as there are tradeoffs between what the organizers spend attention on and what not, webcast should be very low on the list of priorities. A live webcast can turn out to be quite a hassle to run smoothly.
In general, I get a negative vibe from people asking for webcast and videos becoming available sooner than later. I view these things as unnecessary luxuries-for-the-insiders, and would hope people in this community manage to instead focus on things that matter (like making the Summit a positive experience for first-timers to these topics). I doubt we’ll lose important information if there’s no webcast or if it takes a while for the videos to become available (personally, I haven’t even bothered to watch the earlier videos, since I expect people to be saying the same things they have written online etc.).
Even if it was mostly a luxury-for-the-insiders—which I’m not convinced it’d necessarily have to be: the event has lots of big-name participants, and with a bit of advertising, you might get a big crowd of watchers who weren’t usually into the Singularity—that doesn’t make it worthless or something that doesn’t matter. People are emotional creatures, and tend to invest more strongly into things or communities they have an emotional attachment to. Creating a feeling of community around the people following the webcast will help build those emotional bonds.
It’s true that some of the audience members might not like being filmed, though. But that has an easy answer: film only the speeches, not the question & answer sessions.
The resources of the organisers are limited, true, and I agree that this isn’t anywhere near the number one priority. It’s up to them to determine whether or not they have the resources for it—but I do want them to be aware of the potential upsides of a webcast they might not have considered.
Having videos available might be a positive experience for first-timers to the website.
Yes webcast would be heaven; a chance to catch all the best at one place
Be careful not to make the webcast too good, singinst folks...