netdev - Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 10 Jun 2021 13:55:23 -0600
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc:     Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>,
        David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
        James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>,
        Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>, Christoph Lameter <cl@...two.de>,
        Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Jiri Kosina <jikos@...nel.org>,
        ksummit@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-block@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, linux-api@...r.kernel.org,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: Maintainers / Kernel Summit 2021 planning kick-off

On 6/10/21 1:26 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300
> Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com> wrote:
> 
>> There will always be more informal discussions between on-site
>> participants. After all, this is one of the benefits of conferences, by
>> being all together we can easily organize ad-hoc discussions. This is
>> traditionally done by finding a not too noisy corner in the conference
>> center, would it be useful to have more break-out rooms with A/V
>> equipment than usual ?
> 
> I've been giving this quite some thought too, and I've come to the
> understanding (and sure I can be wrong, but I don't think that I am),
> is that when doing a hybrid event, the remote people will always be
> "second class citizens" with respect to the communication that is going
> on. Saying that we can make it the same is not going to happen unless
> you start restricting what people can do that are present, and that
> will just destroy the conference IMO.
> 
> That said, I think we should add more to make the communication better
> for those that are not present. Maybe an idea is to have break outs
> followed by the presentation and evening events that include remote
> attendees to discuss with those that are there about what they might
> have missed. Have incentives at these break outs (free stacks and
> beer?) to encourage the live attendees to attend and have a discussion
> with the remote attendees.
> 
> The presentations would have remote access, where remote attendees can
> at the very least write in some chat their questions or comments. If
> video and connectivity is good enough, perhaps have a screen where they
> can show up and talk, but that may have logistical limitations.
> 

You are absolutely right that the remote people will have a hard time
participating and keeping up with in-person participants. I have a
couple of ideas on how we might be able to improve remote experience
without restricting in-person experience.

- Have one or two moderators per session to watch chat and Q&A to enable
   remote participants to chime in and participate.
- Moderators can make sure remote participation doesn't go unnoticed and
   enable taking turns for remote vs. people participating in person.

It will be change in the way we interact in all in-person sessions for
sure, however it might enhance the experience for remote attendees.

thanks,
-- Shuah