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:   Tue, 22 Jun 2021 17:57:11 -0600
From:   Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>
Cc:     Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        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 6/22/21 5:33 PM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 6/22/21 4:59 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>> Hi Shuah,
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 04:33:22PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>> On 6/18/21 7:46 AM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Jun 10, 2021 at 01:55:23PM -0600, Shuah Khan wrote:
>>>>> On 6/10/21 1:26 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Jun 2021 21:39:49 +0300 Laurent Pinchart 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.
>>>>
>>>> A moderator to watch online chat and relay questions is I believe very
>>>> good for presentations, it's hard for a presenter to keep an eye on a
>>>> screen while having to manage the interaction with the audience in the
>>>> room (there's the usual joke of the difference between an introvert and
>>>> an extrovert open-source developer is that the extrovert looks at 
>>>> *your*
>>>> shoes when talking to you, but in many presentations the speaker
>>>> nowadays does a fairly good job as watching the audience, at least from
>>>> time to time :-)).
>>>>
>>>> For workshop or brainstorming types of sessions, the highest barrier to
>>>> participation for remote attendees is local attendees not speaking in
>>>> microphones. That's the number one rule that moderators would need to
>>>> enforce, I think all the rest depends on it. This may require a larger
>>>> number of microphones in the room than usual.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Absolutely. Moderator has to make sure the following things happen for
>>> this to be effective:
>>>
>>> - Watch chat and Q&A, Raise hand from remote participants
>>> - Enforce some kind of taking turns to allow fairness in
>>>     participation
>>> - Have the speaker repeat questions asked in the room (we do that now
>>>     in some talks - both remote and in-person - chat and Q&A needs
>>>     reading out for recording)
>>> - Explore live Transcription features available in the virtual conf.
>>>     platform. You still need humans watching the transcription.
>>> - Have a running session notes combined with transcription.
>>>
>>> Any of these options aren't sustainable when large number of people
>>> are participating remotely or in-person. In general a small number of
>>> people participate either in person or remote in any case, based on
>>> my observation in remote and in-person settings.
>>>
>>> Maybe we can experiment with one or two workshops this time around
>>> and see how it works out. If we can figure an effective way, it would
>>> be beneficial for people that can't travel for one reason or the
>>> other.
>>
>> Can we nominate moderators ahead of time ? For workshop-style
>> discussions, they need to be a person who won't participate actively in
>> the discussions, as it's impossible to both contribute and moderate at
>> the same time.
>>
> 
> Correct. It will be impossible to participate and moderate in workshop
> setting. We have to ask for volunteers and nominate moderators ahead of
> time.
> 

Subsystems could seek volunteers from other subsystems perhaps ...

thanks,
-- Shuah

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ