3 ms·
One audience may be courts. A great deal of time, effort, and money goes into high-quality telepresence (at least in my area) for offenders who cannot attend co
by vermilingua 4y ago
One audience may be courts. A great deal of time, effort, and money goes into high-quality telepresence (at least in my area) for offenders who cannot attend court (due to COVID, the nature of their offense, etc).
As other commenters have mentioned in this thread, there are lots of unconscious (and fully conscious) biases against interaction over video conference, and a key function of the courts is to eliminate bias from the judicial system.
This, obviously, is much less "sexy" than slick co-working and corporate spaces, so Google doesn't advertise it; but I would be surprised if courts weren't one of the early adopters if this technology becomes commercially viable.
- iudqnolq 4y ago> A great deal of time, effort, and money goes into high-quality telepresence (at least in my area) for offenders who cannot attend court (due to COVID, the nature of their offense, etc). Interestingly this is the exact opposite of what I've heard: Prisoners are sat in front of low-quality cameras that barely work on a good day, and have a hard time comprehending what's said and being comprehended. "Luckily", that's usually not necessarily in our current system. If you're comfortable do you mind sharing what court you're talking about?
- vermilingua 4y agoI've done a fair bit of work in various courts, prisons, and police stations in NSW (Australia). All (where remote court hearings are performed) have pretty professional Webex setups for dialing in, and there are projects underway to improve this further with dedicated studio booths with active and passive noise cancellation. It's possible that NSW is the anomaly here, but I suspect that it holds true at least Australia wide, and in some areas abroad.
- iudqnolq 4y agoWhoops, I assumed that America is the default again.