Zoom is useless

[sorka]

There's quite a few reasons this is difficult to do, application permissions and stream encoding being two of the largest ones. It helps to remember that at the end of the day, the MCU is running Linux - if you were to try to use your webcam within multiple applications on your computer at the same time, you would run into this same issue. There's a whole segment of software like Anycam on desktop platforms that's designed to get around this limitation, by duplicating the stream out of your webcam into multiple "virtual" webcams, but this does require some processing overhead.

In short, it's theoretically "possible" but not really practical to do in-car.

OK, but it all works fine when you're parked. I'm not sure why driving makes a difference. The cameras all continue to record to USB just fine even with zoom video.

I agree there are technical reasons why it might not be possible with their hardware but I'd be surprised if that was actually the case.

 

[cowleggies]

Sure but it works while you're parked and there's very little uplink data being transmitted while you're driving.

Zoom uses between 0.5GB - 1GB of data per hour when sharing video, which would add up quickly. Audio-only streams are between 1/10-1/20th of that. I can easily see how AT&T wouldn't be okay with unfettered video streaming, but fine with audio. But to be clear, I don't think the data use is the primary reason for this limitation - it's a liability concern for Tesla. Same reason Theater can't be used while driving.

 

[MP3Mike]

But to be clear, I don't think the data use is the primary reason for this limitation - it's a liability concern for Tesla. Same reason Theater can't be used while driving.

No, not at all the same. Zoom wouldn't be displaying any video, just sending yours to other participants. I can't see any more liability with that then they already have by providing the audio conferencing while driving.

 

[cowleggies]

No, not at all the same. Zoom wouldn't be displaying any video, just sending yours to other participants. I can't see any more liability with that then they already have by providing the audio conferencing while driving.

I think the line of thinking is that you being a video participant on a call while driving is "distracted driving" behavior. Audio conferencing while driving is functionally identical to a phone call, which is well-established by the NHTSA to be "safe" when done hands-free.

There's very little upside from Tesla's perspective to allow video functionality when driving, and frankly very little upside to the end user - all the participants are going to see is you (hopefully) paying attention to the road and not paying attention to the Zoom call you're on.

For Tesla, that seems like a no-brainer CYA move. Given the flak that they've gotten in the past from the NHTSA for Arcade being able to be used by "passengers" while in motion, and the bad press they've gotten for years with drivers using Autopilot in unsafe ways, it's easy to see why they went this way.

There's a reason there's a disclaimer when you open Zoom on Tesla that says "Distracted driving can lead to accidents resulting in serious injury or death. Please pay attention to traffic conditions and comply with local laws. If you are hosting a meeting, consider designating a co-host." - it's a CYA for liability on Tesla's part.

 

[BitJam]

I agree there are technical reasons why it might not be possible with their hardware but I'd be surprised if that was actually the case.

As you have shown, it's probably technically possible. But I don't think sending video of someone driving their car seemed like a big selling point. The benefit is small. It makes sense to not include this feature in the initial release even if there were no obvious technical roadblocks. So far, I have not seen a compelling argument for why this feature should be added.

Oh, I see cowleggies just said the same thing only better.

 

[smak]

Is there an actual reason you want people to watch you while you drive, or is it just a cool thing to show off with?

 

[sorka]

As you have shown, it's probably technically possible. But I don't think sending video of someone driving their car seemed like a big selling point. The benefit is small. It makes sense to not include this feature in the initial release even if there were no obvious technical roadblocks. So far, I have not seen a compelling argument for why this feature should be added.

Oh, I see cowleggies just said the same thing only better.

Except that I have work meetings that require being on video. I'm not required to look at the video...hence the title of this thread. The compelling reason would be to make the product better so people don't complain. With Tesla, that's very hit and miss.

 

[BitJam]

Except that I have work meetings that require being on video. I'm not required to look at the video...hence the title of this thread. The compelling reason would be to make the product better so people don't complain. With Tesla, that's very hit and miss.

To me, that does not seem like a compelling reason to add drive-time outgoing zoom video. It seems like a reason to have your company alter their policy. If you're allowed to participate in the meetings while driving does anyone actually benefit from being able to see you drive?

 

[sorka]

To me, that does not seem like a compelling reason to add drive-time outgoing zoom video. It seems like a reason to have your company alter their policy. If you're allowed to participate in the meetings while driving does anyone actually benefit from being able to see you drive?

No more than if I were sitting parked or just standing in my office. Heck, why even have video?

 

[MP3Mike]

If you're allowed to participate in the meetings while driving does anyone actually benefit from being able to see you drive?

Yes, they do. There is a lot that can be gained by observing the facial expressions when people say something. (And why I try not to be on video as much as possible.)

 

[sorka]

Zoom uses between 0.5GB - 1GB of data per hour when sharing video, which would add up quickly. Audio-only streams are between 1/10-1/20th of that. I can easily see how AT&T wouldn't be okay with unfettered video streaming, but fine with audio. But to be clear, I don't think the data use is the primary reason for this limitation - it's a liability concern for Tesla. Same reason Theater can't be used while driving.

I agree this is more likely the real reason rather than it being a technical one. Limiting it to only when you sit still is likely to use 1/10th the amount of data as if you were allowed to transmit video while driving.

As far is it being a liability, you clearly haven't been following the thread. This has nothing to do with zoom receiving video while driving.

 

[sorka]

I think the line of thinking is that you being a video participant on a call while driving is "distracted driving" behavior. Audio conferencing while driving is functionally identical to a phone call, which is well-established by the NHTSA to be "safe" when done hands-free.

But that's the point. It is audio conferencing only for the driver while the vehicle is in motion whether the drivers video is being transmitted or not.

 

[sorka]

Is there an actual reason you want people to watch you while you drive, or is it just a cool thing to show off with?

The reason was already stated. Read the thread.

 

[Operator64]

But that's the point. It is audio conferencing only for the driver while the vehicle is in motion whether the drivers video is being transmitted or not.

That’s called a phone call

 

[sorka]

That’s called a phone call

Exactly...hence the title of my post

 

[smak]

The reason was already stated. Read the thread.

Are you required to be on video to be on video or do they want to see you “working”.

 

[Operator64]

Exactly...hence the title of my post

If only they made a zoom app for a phone and a mount to put in a car

 

[cowleggies]

As far is it being a liability, you clearly haven't been following the thread. This has nothing to do with zoom receiving video while driving.

There's no reason to be rude. The point I've been trying to illustrate to you is that just because you don't deem it a liability doesn't mean Tesla, or governing bodies like the NHTSA don't. At the end of the day, if it were both technically feasible and not a liability of some kind, Tesla would have allowed that functionality. They didn't disable video while driving to spite you.

We can speculate all we want as to why they've chosen to do so, and that's what we're doing here - speculating. Your guess is on the specifics is as good as mine.

 

[sorka]

Are you required to be on video to be on video or do they want to see you “working”.

It's a presence issue. Folks on the meetings tend to tune more when they can't see others and aren't themselves seen. Also, there's value in seeing facial expressions and body language to some degree. This isn't an issue during active presentation.

 

[sorka]

If only they made a zoom app for a phone and a mount to put in a car

Exactly what I do now and not likely to change that because of the current Tersla implementation hence the reason for calling it "useless" since I won't be using it in place of my current solution unless they fix some things.