Most everyone is heading back to work, if they were able to take time off this summer.
Not me, not yet.
I managed to attend a few hours of Science Online London. I was in my pajamas, later crumb-strewn, cross-legged in front of my computer from 4:30 a.m. until the delegates broke for lunch. I had coffee when they did. I was animating the body of a Second Life avatar – and frankly, found it useless, once the link to the video feed was provided so that I could watch through certain kind attendees’ webcams in my browser. The idea was pretty fun, and those in the Royal Institution seemed to enjoy “seeing” Dave Munger, and our comments live, while he spoke. Many thanks to Joanna Scott and her henchmen for setting this up and reassuring those of us who tried to “attend” in this way, during what must have been a stressful day.
Martin, one of the organizers, (and lots of others) wrote a lot about the conference already. I was very flattered that Martin noticed that I participated in live blogging from notes I was typing on FriendFeed and Twitter (bravo to the person who thought of the short-but-unique hashtag #solo09) during the video feed I was watching from atop a bed in Newton, Massachusetts.
Aside from the novelty and promise of the experience, I must admit that I did not learn much from the little of the conference I attended thus.
I did not benefit from meeting people in the flesh whom I admire from afar – a major positive impact on productivity, to which I had not previously attributed its true value.
Despite a highly renewed roster of speakers relative to last year’s conference, clearly different sessions and a swing away from discussing primarily the benefits of blogging, I somehow felt that I was not hearing anything I hadn’t already heard. This may have been in part because for some reason, Petra Boynton and David Allen Green’s joint session on legal constraints of publishing via participation in blogs, online forums, Second Life, Twitter, FriendFeed, FaceBook, etc…. was off limits for a live video feed, even to a closed and select online community. Perhaps Second Life was not closed and select enough, in comparison to the selection of those who could attend live. Anyhow, I am sure that talk would have been new to me, although a fair bit can be gleaned from reading their blogs.
The session for example about What is a scientific paper? is not unfamiliar to those frequenting Nature Network, the Life Scientists room of FriendFeed, or the many other sites to which their denizens link.
I already knew that Corie Lok and any other community manager works like mad to keep online (scientific) communities on their feet and functioning. And I am highly grateful for their efforts.
In these ways, I feel like a know-it-all. But then there were the highly technical sessions about various potentially useful tools. This is where vacation mind set in, and I felt like a know-nothing; worse, hardly interested. I haven’t even plumbed the depths of potential of the tools for which I had signed up before last year’s conference. How to choose among them!? Do I really want to be a scientific web-tool trendsetter? (The answer is clearly, no.)
Second Life is promising but clearly inadequate for live conference transmission and the relaying of questions to speakers in real time, in competition with folks who are actually present in the room. I would have been more enthusiastic had the videos worked for all distant attendees within the SL framework, and even more so had we been able to flip between the feeds in the breakout sessions like so many open terminal screens. The other potential I thought SL might have, which was impossible to realize, was to permit the transmission of questions from the audience by live voice. This would have been very tricky to moderate, but it’s something to keep in mind for next year – if there is a next year – and perhaps without the SL framework. Or the speakers could receive the live “chat” questions from SL or equivalent, and choose to answer some of them directly, without their having to be announced viva voce by folks who kindly proposed to be go-betweens.
All in all, it was entertaining, but clearly nothing beats the stimulation of a live scientific conference as of yet. I wonder how Science Online 2010 can build on earlier conferences such as Science Online London 2009 next January, and how future conferences on the theme of using the Internet to facilite the communication and execution of science, will continue to evolve.
Sorry you couldn’t make it in First Life, and to hear that the 2nd life experience wasn’t quite up to the mark. Have others had a good experience with this technology (which must have great promise) at other events?
I wonder whether the CREW people might have some useful ideas about real-time conference-casting? I have a feeling that they are more about capturing and replaying later, but worth a thought.
Hi Heather, interesting post, shame you couldn’t make it in the flesh this year. So you’re one of those infamous bloggers in pyjamas . Welcome to the club :-)
Stephen – I couldn’t say, I was such a newcomer to the software. Perhaps Joanna can answer that. Alan Cann (AJCann) suggests a platform like Elluminate which I have also never tried. But I am sure the right software is already out there, somewhere. Distance learning seems like a good place to start looking for it.
Frank – CREW sounds like a very good way to archive a conference and all the meta-data from simulcast or regular blogging in one accessible manner. Worth bringing to the attention of organizers for next year.
Duncan – was wondering if anyone would notice :-) As long as I don’t abuse my powers to only defend former presidents.
You know, it never even occurred to me to attend Science Online by, um, er, attending online. Thanks for the summary.
I thought about it – but was put off by a) the 1 am PST start time and b) the need to invest several hours learning to navigate SL first (I’ve never tried it before, but several people have told me it’s tricky to get to grips with). I’m sorry you didn’t think it lived up to the potential, but to be honest I’m kinda grateful I didn’t bother ;)
Glad to be of service, um, I think ;-)
Thanks for highlighting my post on the what is a scientific paper session, much appreciated. I suspect that this topic will be discussed endlessly over the coming years as web and other communication technologies evolve.