Slashdot Mirror


Persistent Home Videoconferencing Solution?

An anonymous reader writes "I'm moving very soon for work, and will be several hundred miles away from my young family for six to nine months. Obviously I'll travel back as often as possible, and there's always Skype and XBLA video, but the whole 'now it's time to talk to dad' thing seems ... a little weak. I was wondering the Slashdot community could help me come up with a more persistent solution. Ideally what I want is an always-on connection between a pc/monitor/camera/speakers in my old kitchen and my new kitchen, so if we're in the kitchens, we can see each other and interact semi-normally. (We're a kitchen-focused family.) Most solutions I can find time out pretty quick, or require some knowledge on the part of the users, and the tech-savvy people are only going to be in one kitchen, to put it politely!" (Read on for a few more details.) "I do have a reasonable number of Windows PCs and Macs (and game consoles), but no alt. OS machines, so something for retail OSes would be better — I haven't tested the PS3 camera for long durations, but I know the conferencing quality with a PS3 is pretty good, and that could be an option too. Any camera recommendations would be good. We have sweet access at our house, but it will need to be wireless to the kitchen from the router."

253 comments

  1. Camera surveillance? by Jack+Malmostoso · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Maybe something for surveillance? It's basically what you want to do, just "in a good way".

    1. Re:Camera surveillance? by Fuzzums · · Score: 2, Funny

      or make sure to stream some ads every 5 minutes.

      --
      Privacy is terrorism.
    2. Re:Camera surveillance? by dziban303 · · Score: 0, Troll

      (We're a kitchen-focused family.)

      What, so, fat?

    3. Re:Camera surveillance? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I realize that ridiculing ordinary Americans with uninformed speculation never gets old, but these days the kitchen has replaced the living room as the center of the home. My Dad built his new house so that the kitchen was the centerpiece - the living room is only used for watching TV, really. It has a large central island with many seats so as to fit a lot of people. Sit around, read the newspaper (yes Dad still subscribes), drink coffee, play games, etc. Everyone who comes over raves about it and says they wish their home was the same way.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    4. Re:Camera surveillance? by i_ate_god · · Score: 1

      You're undressing in the kitchen?

      --
      I'm god, but it's a bit of a drag really...
    5. Re:Camera surveillance? by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1, Funny

      Probably, so I'd start by recommending a wide-angle (maybe even fisheye) lens webcam...

    6. Re:Camera surveillance? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      I think I saw a movie like that, didn't he get caught screwing a pie?

    7. Re:Camera surveillance? by astar · · Score: 1

      haha, ah I did say state of undress :-) Not everyone wears pj's and midnight snack attacks do happen to people. And even fully decent, you might not really want someone to see you in the morning before you do your makeup and deal with your hair.

      And people on slashdot would not know, but sometimes there is a good reason to undress in the kitchen!

    8. Re:Camera surveillance? by ooshna · · Score: 1

      And people on slashdot would not know, but sometimes there is a good reason to undress in the kitchen!

      Aren't you on /. right now?

    9. Re:Camera surveillance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly it's a highly autonomous robot, and not a person.

      From Japan. Since only there would you expect robots to know something about undressing.

    10. Re:Camera surveillance? by astar · · Score: 1

      you point to the flakiness of statistical analysis in relation to truth

    11. Re:Camera surveillance? by morari · · Score: 1

      It's like Chatroulette!

      --
      "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    12. Re:Camera surveillance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So that's a yes?

    13. Re:Camera surveillance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Totally agree - Axis M1031-W for it's wireless and audio capabilities plus a router that can do VPN, such as a Linksys WRT54GL with dd-wrt or such. H264 looks great, I've got a new M1054 and it's awesome. 2 way audio. Use the Active X control.

    14. Re:Camera surveillance? by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      I've noticed that too, at parties I throw. No matter how much food or drink I put in other rooms, music, etc., I'm usually having to squeeze through people to work in the kitchen as everyone jam packs in there.

      I even took to putting small dorm fridges with beer, and the kegerator in another room, and STILL - I don't understand it at all.

      I mean, it's nice you want to socialize with the cook and everything, but give me a little space to work. Stir fry is tough when I have a person at each elbow.

  2. Creepy by Manip · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sorry but that is creepy dude. I do the long distance thing, and trust me, I wouldn't even want what you suggest. But that being said I like to try and be helpful so my suggestion would be a Network Web-Camera which you can purchase from NewEgg (wired or wireless), which you'll be able to remote into, and then have a PC with Skype or Live Messenger running, with auto-answer enabled, that has your face / audio. Then get a router with Dynamic DNS support, you then visit the Dynamic DNS address on a particular port that you have forwarded to your network web-camera, and dial the Skype/Live Messenger account - which will auto answer. They can then speak to you by approaching the computer and talking into the desk microphone, and you can see everyone from the web-portal/Java Applet provided by your network web-cam.

    1. Re:Creepy by Xacid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'll have to disagree about your creepy statement (but I do appreciate still offering your advice).

      Dads being gone, especially with little ones can have pretty large effects. I think it'd be kind of cool to still be able to have that "hey dad guess what!?" pop out of the middle of no where. It's those unscheduled moments that are going to win with a good set up.

    2. Re:Creepy by odies · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It depends how old the kids are. Even when I was 6-7 years old it would had been really creepy and I would had felt weird knowing someone follows me from a camera.

      But it's not just for the kids. What about his wife? Somehow I think she also doesn't like someone watching her every action via video camera. I wouldn't and I really doubt my girlfriend would either. It's a different thing when you're physically there, but cameras are creepy.

      So why not just do the normal "enable video camera when needed" and call with something like Skype?

    3. Re:Creepy by BrokenHalo · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I know exactly how I would have felt as a kid (even though that would have been inconceivably long ago for most readers) if I had discovered I was being observed any or all moments:

      I would have taken steps to disable it. A blanket over the camera, and/or cables being snipped. Whatever works. Such a "persistent solution" is an intrusion. For instance, although I love Skype, I do not need my camera displaying my deshabille or the state of my house to the world. (Actually, the camera on my laptop has a discreet little piece of insulating tape obscuring the lens.)

    4. Re:Creepy by iksbob · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He's not talking about following them around with the camera, or surveilling the whole house. He's talking about setting up a two-way link between two terminals in fixed, public (in the context of the home) locations. If someone doesn't want to be observed, simply don't stand in front of the terminal.

    5. Re:Creepy by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's only weird when it's one way. The key is to make sure that when you can see someone on the screen, they can also see you on their screen. If the screens are big enough, it's almost like a window.

    6. Re:Creepy by ddillman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think we should give the OP the benefit of the doubt and assume he's got his family onboard with the idea. Assuming so, do (all of you expressing negative opinions of the OP's idea) have anything constructive to add, or are (all of you) just into expressing your opinion regardless of whether it solves the problem as requested?

      --
      Little girls, like butterflies, need no excuse. -- L. Long
    7. Re:Creepy by Belial6 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It's not only weird when it is one way. It is also weird when you are doing your new location girlfriend, and the wife and kids come home and are confronted with real time porn of dad who is 1000 miles away.

    8. Re:Creepy by similar_name · · Score: 1

      I don't think you would have had to 'discover' it. He's not hiding the camera in the toaster.

      I would imagine if the screen is big enough or obvious enough on both ends it would be something like walking into the kitchen and if Dad is in the kitchen on the other side you'll see him and say 'hi'. Presumably he may notice you walk in out of the corner of his eye as he's making a sandwich.

      Now granted if your just paranoid about the idea of cameras in general then you wouldn't like it, of course pointing out that cameras are everywhere is obvious. Unless Mom's cheating on top of the kitchen table there's not much nefarious that's going to happen in a kitchen.

    9. Re:Creepy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You obviously had distant unloving parents if you think that's creepy.

    10. Re:Creepy by x2A · · Score: 1

      Well it's certainly good that you're only sharing how you think you would've felt in a hypothetical past situation upon the reflection at this later date, and not suggesting that you have more insight into the feelings and reactions of some children that you don't know than their own father does, cuz that would be somewhat arrogant. I do hope at least we can remember than different people are different, and that we shouldn't generalise from self, or judge based on self.

      --
      The revolution will not be televised... but it will have a page on Wikipedia
    11. Re:Creepy by Anachragnome · · Score: 3, Funny

      "It's only weird when it's one way."

      Well, what about half way?

      Here's whatcha do.

      You get a male, adult mannequin, dress it up like dad (get the facial hair just right!), and prop it up in the breakfast nook. Put the video camera that dad will be getting his feed from behind one of the eyes of the mannequin (I do NOT recommend the "Third Eye" effect. THAT shit is creepy) and put the speakers he will be heard over behind the mouth.

      If anybody wants to chat with dad, they go sit with him in the breakfast nook. Rap about school over bagels and lox.

      If you add accessories, your wife can haul it into the bedroom after the kids go to sleep. I suggest http://www.adulttoys.com/ and http://www.apogeekits.com/pc_remote_controls.htm combined for a full array of functions.

      Dad can also be parked on the front porch while everyone is away, keeping a watchful eye on the home-front. Park a nice lemonade or beer next to him for the full effect.

      "Get off of my lawn, you punk kids!" BBZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!!

    12. Re:Creepy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the idea of internet bandwidth being taken up 24 hours a day by a guy who's trying to make sure his wife is cheating on him doesn't really appeal to me.

      Imagine if every paranoid spouse did this? There wouldn't be any bandwidth left for... well... porn (the spouse of the single man).

    13. Re:Creepy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are (all of you) just into expressing your opinion regardless of whether it solves the problem as requested?

      Dude. This. is. /.

    14. Re:Creepy by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      I think this is different. If my Dad were away often (and he effectively was, working night shifts), I'd have killed to have a quick window I could poke my "virtual" head through and chat with him.

      How is this any different than dad being in the living room or something? It's not like he's a total stranger.

      It's not a set-up for everybody, but with today's folks having to be mobile, simply to keep themselves above water, unable to sell their homes, unable to move to where the jobs are... it's a great way to be in touch whenever the urge strikes, and not just as specific times of the day.

    15. Re:Creepy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I agree with the notion that churning bandwidth to send an image of two empty kitchens 3,000 miles to a terminal with no-one there.

      I was thinking motion detector to flag when there was actually someone there to set a "light"/ring a bell on the remote station, when both station detected a presence, then and only then turn on the feed. An "always on" connection is greedy and won't scale, even if the pricing structure doesn't reflect it, a responsible geek shouldn't promote it

      And whats with all the Creepy/cheating thoughts? Is Slashdot THAT paranoid? Or just not too many with wives & family? 1 two way camera in the Kitchen is the worst spy solution I've ever heard of. If his wife want two cheat, she just doesn't bring the guy into the kitchen (why would he even be in the house if there are kids? They will be in a hotel room, or the car at work, or hundreds of other places. If you decide it bugs you, hang a towel over the lens, or turn it off. This is not I want to install GPS trackers on my wife's car, which brand do you guys recommend, or how do I secret RFID trackers in my family so I can tell what room they are in. Yes, you need to think about potential creepy factors, but as guy whose dad was away 3 weeks then home one for his entire career at a time when international calls we insanely expensive if even possible, I know exactly the kind of disconnect he's concerned about

    16. Re:Creepy by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      And exactly how normal and spontaneous is that?

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    17. Re:Creepy by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Assuming so, do (all of you expressing negative opinions of the OP's idea) have anything constructive to add, or are (all of you) just into expressing your opinion regardless of whether it solves the problem as requested?

      This is slashdot, take a wild fucking guess.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    18. Re:Creepy by ddillman · · Score: 1

      As I expected, but if one never tries, it will never get better.

      --
      Little girls, like butterflies, need no excuse. -- L. Long
  3. Panasonic IP camera by way2trivial · · Score: 2, Informative

    very IE dependent, but we had a setup with a microphone (internal to the device) and external speakers,

    my wifes family from overseas could manage it without a problem
    the remote viewer had 'click to talk' functionality- we'd be in the office and suddenly the speakers would crackle 'szia' and they could see the grandchildren and we could talk clearly...

    setup was technical, using it was not...

    video was one sided only..

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    1. Re:Panasonic IP camera by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      That's the one thing to be concerned about: audio looping back through the microphone from the speakers, around and around and around... it would take a good setup to prevent a horrible echo.

    2. Re:Panasonic IP camera by adolf · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Axis IP cameras are cheaper than Panasonic, and aren't as reliant upon IE running on specific versions of Windows.

      (Disclaimer: I sell both.)

      But: The problem with IP cameras is that you still need a computer-ish device to view them with. There are apps for something like an iPod Touch which can do it, but I have my doubts about them having good audio support.

      And there won't be any echo cancellation happening, which is really rather needed if headsets aren't used for audio. (Nothing quite like hearing "Hey Dad!" echo over and over again with a second or so of latency as bounces back and forth across the country...)

      So, it's going to need teleconferencing-specific software. My suggestion, therefore, is a cheap, used laptop at each end, preferably with a built-in camera. Several-years-old laptops are plenty fast enough to do this sort of work.

      For software? Who knows... Try some of the obvious choices, and see if any are dumb enough to get the job done persistently, while being smart enough to get the things right that need gotten right (echo cancellation, for instance).

    3. Re:Panasonic IP camera by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      And there won't be any echo cancellation happening, which is really rather needed if headsets aren't used for audio. (Nothing quite like hearing "Hey Dad!" echo over and over again with a second or so of latency as bounces back and forth across the country...)

      Or, you know, he could put the microphone where it won't pick up noise from the speakers. Bar musicians can figure out where to set up their PA speakers and monitors to avoid feedback, I'd hope any /. reader could do the same...

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    4. Re:Panasonic IP camera by adolf · · Score: 1

      Or, you know, he could put the microphone where it won't pick up noise from the speakers. Bar musicians can figure out where to set up their PA speakers and monitors to avoid feedback, I'd hope any /. reader could do the same...

      Or, you know, he could realize that it doesn't work that way. Bar musicians avoiding room-reinforced resonance have a very different problem to solve. And they don't often get to deal with this by modifying speaker placement (because it's a bar and there just aren't many options). I'd hope any /. reader would know what this is not the same as killing echo, and would understand that the common fix for feedback just won't work for very latent, broadband echo.

      Try it: Find a microphone. It can be good, cheap, directional, or omnidirectional. Most any microphone other than the noise cancelling sort will work for this demonstration (but those aren't suited for the sort of work the Asker is asking about, anyway). Find a digital delay (or download one). Place the microphone someplace where you think it "won't pick up noise from the speakers."

      Set up your sound card and delay so that stuff from the microphone comes out of the speakers about 500-1000 ms later.

      Talk to the microphone at videoconferencing distances -- arms length or so -- and listen with your ears. Try to move things around to get rid of the secondary echo without just turning the speakers down so far that they're mostly inaudible. After you fail (or find that the solution involves building an anechoic chamber),

      (Disclaimer: I run sound for musicians in bars.)

      Consumer-level echo cancellation isn't exactly new tech. It's a part of every full-duplex speakerphone that's worth using. It's a common solution for VOIP, and it's used on modern cell phones for the same reason.

      Any /. reader should understand that this isn't trivial problem to solve.

  4. Skype + Auto Answer by petree · · Score: 5, Informative

    Create a dedicated Skype account which is set to auto start video and accept calls from it's contact list, add your skype to that contact list and you're all set. All you have to do is click call whenever you're in your kitchen and there will be a video uplink. Runs on windows or mac with any old x86 box and webcam, pretty close to $0. Just make sure the PC doesn't go to sleep (more than $0).

    1. Re:Skype + Auto Answer by sznupi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      With Skype for...TVs it even begins to look like the old scifi dream...

      Might be interesting if TVs/large displays on both sides are at the ends of tables.

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    2. Re:Skype + Auto Answer by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      With Skype for...TVs it even begins to look like the old scifi dream...

      Might be interesting if TVs/large displays on both sides are at the ends of tables.

      Yes, I've used Skype and other video conferencing apps on a 56" HD TV. It really is cool to see larger-than-life representations of people on the other end. Kinda like being on the bridge of a typical Federation starship, where everyone you interact on-screen with is bigger than you are. Well, okay, like that minus all the nifty consoles, pointed ears, warp drives and hot Bantu women in miniskirts. But other than that.

      Unless he's has a corporate-level Internet connection, he'll probably not want the thing transmitting continuously, just when someone is in the room. Might make sense, in that case, to interface the system with a motion sensor and only load the video conferencing application when the sensor picks someone up (or if you're using an open-source app, modify it to monitor the sensor directly.) I know some security programs that I've worked with (well, okay, pretty much all of them) for monitoring remote cameras have motion detect in software, but that's a different application entirely.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:Skype + Auto Answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I was thinking just this. It'll last long enough each time you connect, and if it's auto-answer then it takes care of the "it's time to call" issue. The one reservation I'd have with that is that it's not just your own bandwidth you're wasting, but a company that provides a free service (it might have small ads, but you won't be viewing them). I imagine most slashdotters couldn't care less about that, but I personally try to avoid wasting other peoples' things. If I did that I'd probably buy some skype credit (that I'd never use). Is there a point to point program you could use with auto-answer? If I were to do something like this I'd just do the following: dynamic DNS, port forwarding (or VPN), point to point video chat program with auto-answer.

    4. Re:Skype + Auto Answer by sznupi · · Score: 1

      Federation solutions aren't perfect (warning: NSFW, in a way, I think...well, mostly deeply disturbing)

      All this makes me want to try videoconferencing using some decent projector - as long as it won't be in the field of view of the camera (fairly easy with many projectors & their mechanisms to correct image geometry when not projecting at a wall "head on"), the results should be really cool. Might even help with eye contact issue, if the camera will be somewhat "hidden" in the screen...

      --
      One that hath name thou can not otter
    5. Re:Skype + Auto Answer by FireFury03 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The one reservation I'd have with that is that it's not just your own bandwidth you're wasting, but a company that provides a free service

      Nope, you're not wasting Skype's bandwidth. Although you might be wasting the bandwidth of the suckers who allow Skype to proxy via them if you're not careful.

      I'd be more inclined to use a SIP based system though, since it isn't proprietary and does the same job. One of the many SIP softphones that do video should do the job, such as Ekiga.

    6. Re:Skype + Auto Answer by spasm · · Score: 1

      Add a motion detector, use the skype api to link the motion detector to 'call [skype account]' at each end, and the thing will connect whenever anyone walks into the kitchen at either end..?

    7. Re:Skype + Auto Answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're using a mac (not sure how to do this under WIndows), you could even set up an applescript that detects the proximity of some bluetooth-enabled device you carry with you, and auto-calls home whenever it's near. That way, even if it does time out, it'll auto reconnect if you're still there.

    8. Re:Skype + Auto Answer by dimeglio · · Score: 1

      This is chat I have right now. Works great. Even get skype on your mobile so you know if they "called." I agree with top poster. This is almost free and very effective. For me at least.

      --
      Views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of the author.
    9. Re:Skype + Auto Answer by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      I use my 61" TV so my toddler's grandparents can Skype and see him. Using the TV means that we can do it in the living room, letting the boy run amok, rather than trying to hold him in front of a computer for an hour. Given how lousy the average camera and Skype video are, HD is irrelevant, actually. I'm completely missing why the OP assumes that Skype would need to be a scheduled thing. He could just open a connection and leave it up indefinitely - am I missing something? The low quality of Skype video means that the bandwidth used isn't all that high, and it seems likely that when not actively being used, and thus the scene mostly being static, the bandwidth used when idle would be even lesser, esp. if the camera's pointed at blank wall.

    10. Re:Skype + Auto Answer by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      The low quality of Skype video means that the bandwidth used isn't all that high, and it seems likely that when not actively being used, and thus the scene mostly being static, the bandwidth used when idle would be even lesser, esp. if the camera's pointed at blank wall.

      Well, even if you're looking at an otherwise static scene, pixels are still changing (even if you can't see them) due to noise, variations in lighting, etc. Skype's programmers might have put in threshold detection of some kind ... or they might not. You'd have to test that with a bandwidth monitor and see what's going on.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
  5. Re:We're a kitchen-focused family. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're a kitchen-focused family.

    You sound fat.

    Projecting?

  6. 2 iphone 4? by fkx · · Score: 1

    Isn't that was that thing is supposed to be for?

    1. Re:2 iphone 4? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, I don't imagine Apple intended two iphones to be permanently mounted in two different kitchens with face chat always on. I don't think that particular use was their motivation. Would it work? Probably, but the dual survaniance camera idea is better.

    2. Re:2 iphone 4? by tqk · · Score: 1

      I thought it a perfectly reasonable reaction. Look at the tech news lately. Every third article is Apple related. Why, because sheeple buy the stuff. It has cache'.

      I was reading something just yesterday where a fanboi piped up and spouted, "Well, anyone with an iPhone would just ...", followed by someone else asking, "iPhone? Any phone can do that, including Droid. Why iPhone?"

      I suspect astroturfing.

      FTC?

      --
      "Tongue tied and twisted, just an Earth bound misfit ..." -- Pink Floyd.
    3. Re:2 iphone 4? by martinX · · Score: 1

      It'd look better on the iPad (if FaceTime on it ever comes to pass) but the audio would need attention. Perhaps a Bluetooth device would be the solution to that problem. Then again, maybe the rumoured iPod Touch with camera would be cheaper. Wait and see.

      --
      When they came for the communists, I said "He's next door. Take him away. Goddam commies."
  7. what you want by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what you want is a cisco telepresence system
    http://www.cisco.com/web/go/telepresence
    they are amazingly fun and give you that 'in the same room' feeling

    everything else would just be some hacked together video chat.

    1. Re:what you want by FireFury03 · · Score: 1

      everything else would just be some hacked together video chat.

      But conversely, everything else probably wouldn't involve selling your childrens' kidneys to pay for it :)

    2. Re:what you want by Killjoy_NL · · Score: 1

      You can always make more kids :)

      --
      This is the sig that says NI (again)
  8. I hate to say it, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    quit your job, or move your family with you.

    1. Re:I hate to say it, but by gman003 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm pretty sure that was his first idea, but for whatever reason, was unfeasible.

    2. Re:I hate to say it, but by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      I agree. If you already have this much separation anxiety, you're asking for nothing but grief and stress in your life by being apart from your family for so long.

    3. Re:I hate to say it, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      +1

      Wouldn't even be an option for me

    4. Re:I hate to say it, but by Ironhandx · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It can very easily be unfeasible, especially in todays market, and he already said he was young. Quitting a job for any reason at a young age without another job to move into is risky in the best of circumstances, and we aren't exactly living in the best of circumstances. Its risky for anyone, but particularly for someone that may not have the experience to be even looked at for a lot of other jobs.

      In the choice between "Leaving my family for 6 months" or "Staying and forcing my family to live in poverty for the next 10+ years because I just didn't want to go" is there really a choice? If you actually do see a choice there I hope you never have dependents, and don't have them now.

    5. Re:I hate to say it, but by sjames · · Score: 1

      Yes, because in our dynamic and powerful economy there's no chance he might be doing it out of fear that he might otherwise be unable to support his family.

      This would be why it's called wage slavery.

    6. Re:I hate to say it, but by anethema · · Score: 1, Informative

      I agree to this. If you're working away from home this often, the chances of your wife cheating on you or leaving you increase tenfold.

      "Lonely" is the absolute worst thing you can make your wife feel if you want to keep her, and is the reason most often given for infidelity.

      --


      It's easier to fight for one's principles than to live up to them.
    7. Re:I hate to say it, but by luis_a_espinal · · Score: 1

      He prefers leaving his family for 6 months than losing his job. That's not "unfeasible", that's just "what he chose".

      Hmmm, yeah he had the choice of keeping the job and make sure he puts food and shit like that on the table for his family, or lose the job in this particular difficult time of the economy. Yeah some choice. Your teenagerish bravado logic is infallible.

    8. Re:I hate to say it, but by Rene+S.+Hollan · · Score: 1

      Well, if you believe the courts, you have to not leave, AND not lose your job, or go to jail (when you can't pay support anymore)... if you are divorced from your ex. Is it such a stretch that leaving to earn income to support a family won't be construed as spousal and child abuse (wahhh! daddy left) if you are married?

      --
      In Liberty, Rene
    9. Re:I hate to say it, but by b1scuit · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are a ton of things that /could/ be, but that doesn't matter. We don't know /what/ his options were, and it could have been as simple as take this job or lose the house. Stop imaging up options for this guy. He had a specific problem he wanted a solution for, not some vague moral dilemma about taking an out of state job and how terrible of a person would be because of it.

    10. Re:I hate to say it, but by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Well, if you believe the courts, you have to not leave, AND not lose your job, or go to jail (when you can't pay support anymore)... if you are divorced from your ex.

      I've seen the courts order the custodial party to not move when it would interfere with visitation rights, but I've never heard of the court ordering the non custodial party to not move. Also, support is based on income. If you have zero income, presuming they don't think you purposefully did it to avoid support and you aren't just beginning the initial support order, then you should have to pay support of $0.

      So yeah, I guess there will be one or two situations close to what you describe out of the millions of divorced people, but there is no location where what you give as expected should be expected.

    11. Re:I hate to say it, but by Rene+S.+Hollan · · Score: 1

      No, what happens is if you move, you don't exercise visitation, and you can lose that right. In extreme situations you can be held in contempt for not exercising it.

      You aren't assessed support on what you earn, you are assessed support on what you can earn, as far as the court deems. And if that means moving half-way around the world, that's what you have to do... and still exercise your visitation rights at your own expense.

      Been there, done that: lost a job in WA (at-will employment) because I was divorced, and that reflected badly on the "family values" of my employer, and got a job in California: about the same income after taxes, actually. Flew back and forth every two weeks and had to maintain a place in WA in order to see my kids.

      I was VERY lucky that I was not ordered to pay support based on earning the same income in WA that I did in CA (higher cost of living in CA when I returned to WA, getting a job closer to the kids, and high state income tax made the after-tax income about the same).

      --
      In Liberty, Rene
    12. Re:I hate to say it, but by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      No, what happens is if you move, you don't exercise visitation, and you can lose that right. In extreme situations you can be held in contempt for not exercising it.

      So your first statement was factually incorrect. And your perspective was from someone who felt wronged, didn't have the result you stated apply to you, and are bitching and moaning about it later.

      I never can figure out if people like you really hate the courts, or whether it's an issue of displaced anger towards the spouse.

      You aren't assessed support on what you earn, you are assessed support on what you can earn, as far as the court deems.

      Support orders differ based on the state, but that's not the rule anywhere I've lived. Unless you are again "over simplifying" about how the courts handle one of the explicit exceptions I gave, where someone was making good money and then lost their job. It sounds like you fell into that, and so you are bitter over that point as well. They shouldn't ever judge you on what they think you might be able to make, which was your statement, but they do judge you based on what you were making at the time of the order just before. At least that will teach you to work for places where "family values" count. I've never heard anyone who claimed they were for "family values" who wasn't evil. Unfortunately, you seem to be pointing your hatred towards the courts and such, rather than the evil people who use "family values" as a shield to harm others.

    13. Re:I hate to say it, but by LBt1st · · Score: 1

      Why is this flamebait? It's exactly what the guy explained in TFA! It's a temporary thing before he moves his whole family for a better life in the long run. Makes perfect sense to me.

    14. Re:I hate to say it, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh my goodness people!!!! Let the man alone!!! I'm sure this was a hard enough decision for him to make and he took all factors into consideration. It's not about separation anxiety or the market or the economy or anything. It's about a person - a father - a husband - that has to do what he has to do and he wants to stay close with his loving family in the process. Stop judging his 'WHY' and just be happy he's trying to take care of his family both financially AND still be a father. Maybe this is his passion and it has nothing to do with money - maybe he's part of our military and has to go fight for you're right to talk all this shit to him. Stop judging people and start working on what's screwed up in YOUR OWN life instead!!!!!!

    15. Re:I hate to say it, but by Rene+S.+Hollan · · Score: 1

      No, my first statement was factually correct, as I've seen it happen. Once is enough.

      I don't feel wronged. I find statutes plainly unconstitutional with few having the resources to challenge them on that basis. I am very fortunate to have not been caught in the trap of not being able to earn an acceptable income locally and deemed in contempt for not seeing my kids after accepting remote employment: I could afford to fly back every two weeks.

      I refer to what courts can, and have done. Read Stephen Baskerville's "Taken into Custody: The War Against Fathers, Marriage, and the Family." It is well cited and researched.

      Support is ordered according to a state formula based on income. But, if the court believes that income is artificially low, based, perhaps on previous earning capability, it has the power to impute income.

      Where people get into trouble is where they have previously paid on the basis of bonus as well as regular income, and bonuses are no longer forthcoming... or leaving a good job to be closer to their kids, and the job they accepted did not pay as well.

      Also, often, individuals falling into dire straights do not have the means to petition the court for an adjustment (one does not need council to do this, but the i-dotting, and t-crossing, can make the process daunting).

      My anger is pointed at the absurd statutes and silly "family" court where one can be deprived of one's children through no fault of one's own: an allegation of abuse is enough to be restrained, with no trial at hand because criminal charges are not laid. Fortunately, I have been lucky in this regard, but it can be a lot worse.

      I know of one case where a mother abducted a daughter from her stay at home father in California, took the child to Illinois, claimed abuse without proof, and got VAWA to fund the case to terminate the father's parental rights -- despite a California court order for the child to be returned.

      --
      In Liberty, Rene
    16. Re:I hate to say it, but by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I refer to what courts can, and have done.

      They have done much bad. They have done much good. Picking out some examples of bad and presenting them as mainstream is lying propaganda.

      I know of one case where a mother abducted a daughter from her stay at home father in California, took the child to Illinois, claimed abuse without proof, and got VAWA to fund the case to terminate the father's parental rights -- despite a California court order for the child to be returned.

      And I know of a case where an abusive husband denied the charges but rightfully lost his rights to see (and abuse) his children. So, what's your point? Everything is fallible. You come across like a nutter with a chip on his shoulder. A list of hand-picked anecdotes is a bunch of disgruntled fathers getting together for mutual masturbation. Yes, justice fails sometimes. For some reason, there's a disproportionate number of blacks on death row for killing whites who got exonerated once DNA testing was involved (a number of them posthumously). Now, is that because the court system is purposefully singling out blacks to fry for murder? You'd assert so, based on your comments here. But I'd attribute it to a desire for revenge/justice and the unreliability of eye witnesses. The justice system may have put them there, but not without great help. Some fathers are getting screwed in the courts, but mainly because the system as a whole was explicitly set up that way because men abuse women much much more often than the reverse. And people do commit perjury to get what they want, but much less often that you'd have use believe.

      So yes, take your position as a martyr. I'll just take it you are a bitter man who spreads vitriol for a pet cause without regard to the truth. I've met plenty of people like you. Even those who actually committed abuse and don't even think they did.

      But the man who files for sole custody (most don't want that) and loses so that she gets sole custody is rare. It's like men file for 50% and women file for sole, and so the courts average it out with women getting 75% custody. I'd say that the men need to smarten up and treat it like a negotiation rather than a request, but the men who actually got sole custody wouldn't know what to do with them (or else more would be filing for sole custody).

    17. Re:I hate to say it, but by Rene+S.+Hollan · · Score: 1

      I strongly suggest you read "Taken Into Custody..." by Stephen Baskerville.

      Where many of us think our experiences are outliers, the research he does suggests there is systemic anti-male, and anti-family discrimination in many court systems.

      It is unacceptable that a parent is indefinitely deprived of access to their children on the basis of an allegation not proven at law.

      Also, men do not abuse women more than the reverse. That is misandrist propaganda.

      --
      In Liberty, Rene
    18. Re:I hate to say it, but by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I strongly suggest you read "Taken Into Custody..." by Stephen Baskerville.

      I'm not currently in the US, the book isn't for sale here, nothing by him is in any library in the country (as far as I can tell from a couple searches), and Amazon wouldn't ship his book here. So, unless you want to send it to me, I'll not be reading it for a while at least.

      Also, men do not abuse women more than the reverse.

      From your link - Women are victims of 85% of all cases of domestic violence. They don't dispute that number. They accept it and assert (with a complete absence of proof or even hinting that there exists any evidence at all) that men are victims of violence but they don't view that violence as a crime.

      Where many of us think our experiences are outliers, the research he does suggests there is systemic anti-male, and anti-family discrimination in many court systems.

      Wah. Try being black. At least the white men don't get sent to jail as often, even if that have children issues. Blacks are discriminated against for criminal charges. And men have advantages in many other places over women, like in jobs and salary. Even if you are right in this case, I still believe the pendulum greatly favors the white male. And I'm not sure the system as a whole favors the women. Certainly one cherry-picking stories can find plenty of them that are against the men, but there are also plenty against the women. What I see most is that the men don't demand full custody, and when they don't get what they didn't ask for, they then complain about the visitation they got when all they asked for was visitation. And I also see that the courts are fair based on the comments by both groups, but that men claim women lied to fabricate stories of abuse with much greater frequency than the opposite. Given the accusations of abuse, the courts are fair, but the men assert the women lie more. I've never seen anything that substantiates that. If there was, then the courts should take that into account when giving rulings. Given my experience, I believe that lies are common from everyone. And no one I've seen come up with a solution for one person's word against another when neither are capable of any evidence either way other than their personal testimony.

    19. Re:I hate to say it, but by plcurechax · · Score: 1

      I'm not currently in the US, the book isn't for sale here, nothing by him is in any library in the country (as far as I can tell from a couple searches), and Amazon wouldn't ship his book here.

      Lots of Slashdot readers are non-US, myself included. Strangely I don't find that any limitation.

      I am not personally familiar with regards to South America or the Middle East and Africa, but I'm guessing it's available via South Africa at least. Otherwise in 2 minutes I found new copies available from UK, Germany, and Australia. Hint, try meta-search sites for books such as http:www.bookfinder.com, AddALL, www.abebooks.com and www.Alibris.com.

      Your accusations of vitriolous seem very harsh of someone, whom by Slashdot standards is being mature and respectful in his criticism. Other than in some no-fault divorce states or provinces, the law does seem to place an a priori burden on male (husband) in regards to both financial settlement and parental access/rights. I agree that divorce is something that is always emotional ugly as like most civil or family court manner, both sides view themselves as having been wronged, and too often there is little or nothing in the way of unbiased confirmation of either parties' claims.

    20. Re:I hate to say it, but by Rene+S.+Hollan · · Score: 1

      Soooo... one inujustice does not count because of another one?

      When I get the funds, I can send a copy of that book your way. I've been doing that to get the message out about corruption in the U.S. family court system. So far, thankfully, I have not seen much of it personally.

      --
      In Liberty, Rene
    21. Re:I hate to say it, but by Rene+S.+Hollan · · Score: 1

      As for not seeking custody in divorce: here in many cases (WA state), the income earner has to pay both attorneys, even if malfeasance is on the part of the counterparty. That makes a custody battle absurd: to pay for both attorneys.

      The issue isn't custody, per se. In many cases, visitation for a working parent makes sense. The issue is (re)gaining it when there is clear evidence of abuse on the part of a mother -- in many cases the children will be put into foster care rather than returned to the father. The ninth circuit court has ruled that placement with closest relatives should happen first, but it doesn't, and often one does not have the financial resources to fight the legal battle.

      Then, when you add Title IV funding, there is an financial incentive for the state to place a child first in foster care, and then adopted out.

      --
      In Liberty, Rene
    22. Re:I hate to say it, but by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Soooo... one inujustice does not count because of another one?

      When the sum of injustices against you are smaller than another group, claiming a systemic set of injustices against you is hypocritical and ignorant. Note, I never said that it wasn't an injustice or that it doesn't count, just that the system stated to be against you is still mostly in your favor. It just seems ignorant or dishonest to argue the system is biased against you when it is still biased for you, just not for the one area you had contact with.

      When I get the funds, I can send a copy of that book your way. I've been doing that to get the message out about corruption in the U.S. family court system. So far, thankfully, I have not seen much of it personally.

      If you got a divorce in Dallas, your case would have gone through the office my mother worked at and she would have been able to work it or the person doing it could have reported to her (but I'm guessing based on timeline that your case would have happened after she retired, not to mention the different location). You've had one and only one personal contact with the system. She's been in front of a judge more than most lawyers or cops. Based off my observations and discussions, I'd assert you are completely wrong, and the books written on the topic are anecdotal crap. I haven't read the one you mentioned, but I have read a number of books on the biases in the US court systems. I have also been involved in a custody order for a child of mine, and haven't had any trouble, other than incompetence on the part of child support agencies.

      I would attribute most of the failings of the system to how perjury is handled. Just like false rape accusations (almost always laid against males), the system has an assumption that swearing to God to tell the truth under penalty of law has some influence over those who would lie to get their way. And in the books I've read about people not liking custody results, they are very anecdotal and usually involve being from the male's perspective with assertions of dishonesty on the part of the other party. I can get it from Amazon, it wouldn't ship here because I was also getting a sippy cup, and for some reason, they won't ship the sippy cup here, but their error messages sometimes don't adequately identify the item they refuse to export.

    23. Re:I hate to say it, but by Rene+S.+Hollan · · Score: 1

      From your link - Women are victims of 85% of all cases of domestic violence. They don't dispute that number. They accept it and assert (with a complete absence of proof or even hinting that there exists any evidence at all) that men are victims of violence but they don't view that violence as a crime.

      I guess you didn't follow the footnotes:

      [17] Straus MA. The controversy over domestic violence by women: A methodological, theoretical,
      and sociology of science analysis. In Arriaga XB and Oskamp S (eds.): Violence in Intimate
      Relationships. Sage Publishers, 1999. http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/CTS21.pdf

      [18]Stets JE and Straus MA. Gender differences in reporting marital violence and its medical
      and psychological consequences. In Straus MA and Gelles RJ (eds): Physical Violence in
      American Families, New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1990. Table 15.

      --
      In Liberty, Rene
    24. Re:I hate to say it, but by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Then, when you add Title IV funding, there is an financial incentive for the state to place a child first in foster care, and then adopted out.

      Ok, you touched on my mother's job in the last one, and my sister's in this. For one, the custody orders in divorces are handled by a different government in Texas (not just different agency, but an entirely different and unrelated goverment). I don't know about WA. So one order from one will have no effect on the other. Regardless of the state's financial incentives, the people working feel no such pressure. There is a push to keep children out of foster care whenever possible. The only reason they wouldn't be placed with the next closest relative is if that relative doesn't want them, can't care for them, or is a danger to them. There is no conceivable case where a capable father wouldn't be given their child. Unless there are unresolved issues of accusations of abuse, assertions that the father still has close ties with the abusive mother, or a lack of interest/ability from the father, he should always end up with the child. I'm under the impression that there are legal resources (Even for working males) to assist if one can't afford the battle, though I've not needed any of those.

      in many cases the children will be put into foster care rather than returned to the father.

      I'm curious about more of those cases. The only things close to that are when the father was accused of abuse or has a criminal record (sometimes just an arrest) and the placement is made to protect the child. So I'd like to hear some examples where a healthy 30-something male with a full-time job and has never had an arrest nor accusation of any crime or violent act against them and had requested full custody at the time of the divorce wasn't given full custody after the mother was sent to jail. You agree that shouldn't happen, but assert things like that do happen. I'm curious how.

      Oh, and I think that the system can't be too far off. The women are complaining now. "Used to be that the child always went to the mother. But it's no longer uncommon for fathers seeking sole custody in a contested case to prevail at least 50 percent of the time, according to [Working Mother magazine]." http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/parenting/working-moms-are-losing-custody-546541/

      Perhaps the issue is that the system is biased against the workers, not males. And that all claims of male bashing are completely false. After all, the women are complaining of losing as well. In a divorce, if both sides are unhappy, then you did something right. And at this point, mens magazines claim the system is unfair, and the women magazines complain the system is unfair, so I think it's not nearly as bad as it once was, and may actually be relatively even now.

    25. Re:I hate to say it, but by Rene+S.+Hollan · · Score: 1

      Ah, you hit one nail on the head: "... accused of abuse or has a criminal record (sometimes just an arrest)."

      This is enough for an RO to be issued by the family court. However, if criminal charges are not laid, there is no opportunity to establish one's innocence, and the mere accusation is enough to keep a parent from their children.

      --
      In Liberty, Rene
    26. Re:I hate to say it, but by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      If he's that young and inexperienced in his career, maybe he shouldn't have had kids? Just a thought.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    27. Re:I hate to say it, but by Ironhandx · · Score: 1

      Doesn't always work that way, and birth control isn't 100% effective.

      Then theres always that night that the two of you go out to a party have a few too many and just forget.

      Real life usually isn't to plan.

  9. Re:We're a kitchen-focused family. by h4rr4r · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Nope, I am a fairly typical scrawny nerdy fellow.

  10. Help me waste bandwidth by WebManWalking · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Do you have any idea how much bandwidth video consumes?

    1. Re:Help me waste bandwidth by mikestew · · Score: 1

      Maybe my sarcasm detector needs calibration, but with a million kitten videos on YouTube, are we supposed to care how much bandwidth this guy consumes? On an individual level, it could be set up to be similar to running a torrent client.

    2. Re:Help me waste bandwidth by WebManWalking · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but this dude wants to spew his IP packets over the Internet all the time, even when neither side is paying any attention to the 2-way feeds. I can't tell if he even realizes how selfishly wasteful that is.

  11. I tried this a few times by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Informative

    I live overseas, and a couple of times I tried to "sit in" on family gatherings (Thanksgiving & Christmas) by virtually "being there" via a webcam and wireless laptop. I literally had a seat in the living room with a laptop sitting there. It didn't work as well as I would have liked. Why? Well for one I couldn't move the webcam about, so as to look at people. Eye contact is very important, I discovered. It gets tiring staring at the same scene directly across from the laptop, and people can't be bothered to move you about. Sort of like being a head in a jar on Futurama - they all have Kabuki-style dedicated assistants to carry them (or robotic bodies). Second, as you're remotely in and your voice is tinny by being on a laptop speaker, it's kind of distracting for everyone else. It always seemed to sidetrack the discussion whenever I said anything. Maybe this was due to novelty, I'm not sure if your family would get used to it after time. Third, even though I was eating the closest thing I could get to a nice dinner (the fanciest bento box they had at the department store, like fifteen bucks which I would have never bought ordinarily), it still wasn't the same as having dinner with the family. Fourth, the time zones although if you go north-south this isn't an issue. I gave up after a few times and just telephoned in and the family handed the phone around until I had had a chat with everyone. Maybe if they fastened the laptop onto a Roomba or something that would have helped.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:I tried this a few times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I agree with DNS-and-BIND. We (me and my girlfriend) used to play RPG with a group of friends and when we moved to another city we setup a skype call so we all could keep playing together. It was awkward, video quality was not as good as we were expecting. Sometimes there were frequent crashes, which was really annoying and took away most of the fun - it's just not nice to be interrupted when you are having a lot of fun... you can shrug it off at the start but in the long term it starts to hurt. Even with a high quality mic it's hard to hear people, specially the ones that are more far away, and it gets much worse with any kind of background noise. Mics simple can't compensate volume levels in the same way as we do and most of them are build to be used really close to one's mouth. Not having eye contact is definitely the worst part. It's hard to focus on who is talking and there's no way to move around. You get the feeling that you watching some event and can't really be part of it.

      If you somehow manage to get a really high quality video feed on both sides and a microphone that works well on an open and not so quiet environment it may be possible to achieve a somewhat working solution. You and your family will still need to have patience and expect failures and crashes from time to time.

    2. Re:I tried this a few times by Thelasko · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Maybe if they fastened the laptop onto a Roomba or something that would have helped.

      There are companies that offer such things. Probably impractical for the OP though.

      --
      One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
    3. Re:I tried this a few times by houghi · · Score: 1

      I understand that it won't work as it is basically looking for a technical solution for a social problem.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    4. Re:I tried this a few times by TerranFury · · Score: 2, Interesting

      More on this idea: Designing Personal Tele-embodiment by Paulos & Canny at Berkeley. In particular, see the "previous work" section.

    5. Re:I tried this a few times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The solution is obvious:

      1. Better cameras and microphones (get a light sensitive HD camera, preferably a stereoscopic one, and a couple of $200 microphones)
      2. Better and bigger displays (get the biggest TV you can find, preferably one that displays in 3D)
      3. Better loudspeakers (buy a decent HIFI system)
      4. Higher digital video bandwidth (anything below 10 Mbit is crap)
      5. Higher digital audio bandwidth (lossless audio)

      So, a half-decent HD stream with lossless stereo audio is about 20 Mbit/s. That adds up to about 6.5 TB per month.

      You're going to have:

      1) ...a fat wallet...
      2) ...and a very good ISP solution...
      3) ...and probably to wait 5-10 years until sufficiently good displays are available for purchase.

      These problems probably explain why professional video conferencing hasn't really taken off. We don't have the bandwidth. Cameras, microphones, displays and hifi-systems aren't cheap enough and good enough.

    6. Re:I tried this a few times by Albanach · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is a bit more expensive, but solves the problem.

      http://www.amazon.com/D-Link-DCS-5300-Network-Internet-Camera/dp/B0001AU9B4

      It's a standalone device, so no computer to run, and probably a minimal power draw.

      You'd need to run ethernet or a wireless to ethernet adapter for each device.

      You do, however, get remote pan and tilt functionality. That should be a boon if you're changing between talking to kids and adults.

      Some criticism as to durability, but those folk were running them for a couple of years. Low light problems are always an issue for webcams, I'd highly recommend visiting Ikea or similar and adding several lights to the kitchen to make it really bright if it's not already.

    7. Re:I tried this a few times by Ekdar · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I've never really understood this argument. Surely using technology to stay in contact with distant family members at least improves the situation?

      And imagine that 500 years from now we have extremely sophisticated androids or 3-D holograms (to the point that they are nearly indistinguishable from humans) which can be controlled (perhaps via a direct brain link) by a remote person. Will you still just throw your arms up and claim that the "social problem" just can't be solved by technology?

      I agree that the whole interacting-with-family-via-laptop-at-Christmas thing seems difficult, but I don't think the lack of effectiveness is simply a result of trying to use technology to solve the problem.

    8. Re:I tried this a few times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thought of being "attached" to a Roomba, even virtually, is enough to make me dizzy!

    9. Re:I tried this a few times by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Second, as you're remotely in and your voice is tinny by being on a laptop speaker, it's kind of distracting for everyone else. It always seemed to sidetrack the discussion whenever I said anything. Maybe this was due to novelty,

      No, it's because the family freak is playing a game of pretend having a laptop at his seat instead actually being there. Goddamn, GO HOME. Most people having dinner with a persons face on a laptop don't tend to react well to it.

      Maybe if they fastened the laptop onto a Roomba or something that would have helped.

      Yes, that would be the ideal solution. Add more technology to the equation It'll fix everything!

      Kill yourself!

    10. Re:I tried this a few times by slater86 · · Score: 1

      Maybe if they fastened the laptop onto a Roomba or something that would have helped.

      Something similar to this?
      http://xkcd.com/413/

      --
      When people ask if I'm an optimist, I say "I hope so". --Bill Bailey
  12. Sounds like you want a media space. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It sounds like you want to create a "media space". This idea has been floating around since around the 1980's at Xerox PARC. See http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=151233.151235 for more details. While this work is quite old, they may have good ideas on how to best integrate persistent video conferencing into a shared/public space. See also: http://www.springerlink.com/content/l17xvjr522l16v62/. Sadly, both links are pay sites, but if you are studying at a university you may have access.

  13. Re:We're a kitchen-focused family. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But a no longer anonymous scrawny nerd!

  14. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  15. Re:We're a kitchen-focused family. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Doh!

  16. Two Laptops? by jarich · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm not seeing the most obvious answer. Put two laptops in the kitchen. Use wireless internet. Use laptops with built in video cameras. Run any of the IM programs that have video capability. Just leave the laptops turned on. Someone walks in, looks over, and says "Hi!"

    1. Re:Two Laptops? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      Hmm. That's onto something there. Have multiple terminals in different locations throughout the house, with different Skype accounts. If you want to get really fancy, hook it up with motion detectors so as to follow people throughout the house, or auto-connect to the location that has most recently sensed movement.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    2. Re:Two Laptops? by CityZen · · Score: 1

      To add to this, have both laptops running a VNC (or other remote desktop) server. If you notice the video connection is down, you can call and VNC in to the remote machine to answer the call. If you want to try out different software, you can easily install it at both ends using VNC.

      Having a PTZ (pan/tilt/zoom) camera can really make a video connection more practical. Unfortunately, I haven't found really good candidates here that both offer good quality and don't cost too much. The Logitech Orbit is okay, but it doesn't have zoom, which is really quite valuable. Having an HD camera can help make up for no zoom. But even NTSC video quality with a good optical zoom easily beats a crappy digital zoom. And then there's the question of the control software. But that's where VNC can solve the problem of control software that only runs on the local machine (where the camera is connected).

    3. Re:Two Laptops? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two laptops/desktops with web cams using an IM program worked for my partner and I when we were separated. There is an addon that allowed each user to automatically accept requests from each other so that took care of any possible timing out. You go to your computer, see the web cams are not on and you send a request for a video call that is automatically accepted. It helped us to remain in each other's lives because we were still able to share our lives with each other. Especially if it's a laptop since you can bring it with you around the house.

      You share space and "live" with each other. Can even listen to each other snoring if you go that route.

      If you think it's an odd way to keep in touch, just think about couples that grow apart or find other people to share a closeness with in a space of a few months because they miss that intimacy.

      They even have webcams that track movements or faces and can automatically move side to side.

    4. Re:Two Laptops? by sonamchauhan · · Score: 1

      If the laptop has bluetooth, and your mobile does too, pair them and script the video IM program to establish a connection on pairing.

      That way, as you're turning the key in the lock, your local kitchen laptop is busy calling your home, and you enter to shouts of "daaady's here"

  17. bogosort chatroulette by circletimessquare · · Score: 2, Funny

    you have your kids turn on chatroulette, and you do the same. if you don't see each other, and you're kids are still not mentally scarred, you bogosort until you find each other

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:bogosort chatroulette by Ironhandx · · Score: 1

      ... and you're kids are still not mentally scarred

      I think you have a high opinion of chatroulette.

    2. Re:bogosort chatroulette by nacturation · · Score: 1

      you have your kids turn on chatroulette, and you do the same. if you don't see each other, and you're kids are still not mentally scarred, you bogosort until you find each other

      These could be your kids: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNSaurw6E_Q

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    3. Re:bogosort chatroulette by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

      Lol that was pretty good

      But talk about guerrilla marketing: advertise to 2-3 people at a time

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  18. Re:We're a kitchen-focused family. by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Well you certainly have the social skills and tack of a stereotypical fat basement-dwelling nerd.

    --
    "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
  19. Re:Camera surveillance? Bandwidth bonus by kanweg · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Nice idea. Such software may already support the feature that video is only sent when there is movement/change. So, you're not wasting bandwidth.

    Perhaps this Mac software suits your needs http://www.bensoftware.com/ss/

    Bert

  20. IP connected video camera? by lbates_35476 · · Score: 1

    You might want to take a look at these IP connected video cameras:

    http://www.axis.com/products/video/camera/ptz/index.htm

    They have pan/zoom so you can control them remotely.

  21. Just use Windows Live Messenger? by neile · · Score: 1

    If all you need is a persistent video stream between two locations, isn't this just setting up a PC/laptop with a webcam in each kitchen, openening an IM video chat session, and leaving the session up and running?

    Neil

  22. NetMeeting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what about NetMeeting?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_NetMeeting

    have fun

  23. Sounds pretty inconvenient. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    What if you or your wife want to bang someone on the kitchen table?

    1. Re:Sounds pretty inconvenient. by brusk · · Score: 1

      Then you move the kitchen table into the living room.

      --
      .sig withheld by request
    2. Re:Sounds pretty inconvenient. by Qubit · · Score: 1

      What if you or your wife want to bang someone on the kitchen table?

      Two kitchens == two kitchen tables?

      I mean, presumably, anyhow. Having just one table betwixt the two would be poor planning.

       
      Or were you more concerned about the video equipment? I mean, I assumed it was a given that you'd mount the stuff on the wall to keep it away from food spills, hot pans, or whatever else goes down in your kitchen.

      --

      coding is life /* the rest is */
    3. Re:Sounds pretty inconvenient. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Dude, this is slashdot. We do not bang.

  24. Re:We're a kitchen-focused family. by h4rr4r · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    And you have a total lack of ability to get a joke.

    I said it only for humor value.

  25. ASUS AiGuru SV1T by davemc168 · · Score: 1

    Seems to be what you need...all in one unit.

    1. Re:ASUS AiGuru SV1T by myocardialinfarction · · Score: 1

      A link: http://www.asus.com/News.aspx?N_ID=YBiaw0wVP6GVZdpn. In the small print, though: "Unlimited calling: All calls are subject to Skype's fair usage policy which is set at 10,000 minutes per month (with a maximum of 6 hours per day)." Still, something to consider. Good luck.

    2. Re:ASUS AiGuru SV1T by raju1kabir · · Score: 1

      Aren't those limits for PC-to-Phone calling? I can't imagine why they'd want to set a limit on PC-to-PC. And many people use way more than 6 hours a day of PC-to-PC.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    3. Re:ASUS AiGuru SV1T by myocardialinfarction · · Score: 1

      Yes - but they'd apply to the AiGuru if the OP chooses that option. For completeness (and anyone who's still reading), the skype fair use policy is at http://www.skype.com/intl/en/legal/terms/fair_usage/.

  26. LifeSize Express by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have always on video for at least one person at my work, it's as though he's sitting at his desk, but he's actually 500mi away. Works very well.

    1. Re:LifeSize Express by easyTree · · Score: 1

      Care to share some implementation details?

  27. Telephone by Alcoholist · · Score: 1

    Keep it simple, mate. Use a telephone. Or Skype. If you want to see pics of the family, have them email them to you. Gmail account is good for this. Having dad call around dinner time could become a very treasured memory for the family. Also remember, you're the one who's taken the remote job, you didn't have to do that.

    Now, if you are thinking surveillance, that's a whole different ball of wax. Might want to have a chat with the fam about that.

    --
    Bibo Ergo Sum.
  28. His wife should insist on the bedrooms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    to make sure he's not up to things more than work while away. It's not like a girlfriend would be in the kitchen anyway.

  29. Re:We're a kitchen-focused family. by AllergicToMilk · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Maybe you shouldn't next time. You are not that funny.

    --
    There are only 6,863,795,529 types of people in the world.
  30. OpenMeetings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Openmeetings should do what you want, and be more controllable than Skype.

    It allows for encryption, for authentication, and it lets you do all sorts of nifty things.

    Get a decent webcam on each side, and you're in business.

  31. Build a Camera Cart by joeharrison · · Score: 0
    1. Re:Build a Camera Cart by asills · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually Scott Hanselman has a better option using Skype and a dedicated PC he uses to talk to his family at home.

      http://www.hanselman.com/blog/SkypingTheWifeFoolproofVideoConferencingWithYourFamilyWhileOnTheRoad.aspx

      Doesn't take much to set up and would probably get one most of the way there.

      --
      -- What did Spock find in Kirk's toilet? The captain's log.
  32. WowWee Rovio? by okoskimi · · Score: 1

    Perhaps a WowWee Rovio (http://www.wowwee.com/en/products/tech/telepresence/rovio) would have worked better for you? Video is only 1-way, though.

  33. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by Diaghilev · · Score: 1

    You're not being very helpful. Or friendly, for that matter. Jeeze, who pissed in your cereal?

    Or judging by the content of your post, cheated on you while you were away?

  34. Consider security cameras by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I use security cameras in my home, and watch them on the internet remotely.

    Buy a set of security cameras with sound included. Most decent DVR security recording systems (QSee) have webservers to allow you to check in on your camera on the internet. That's only a one way street though to show you a picture of your house. http://www.smarthome.com/_/Cameras_Surveillance/_/13/land.aspx Costco has a few models, but pretty limited as compared to smarthome and qsee online.

    There may be a wireless survelliance variety that allows you to plug into the internet easily and monitor remotely.
    DLink can host their cameras via Ip connection. Or use your MS homeserver as a DVR http://hq.dlink.com/whs
    http://www.dlink.com/category/productcategories/?cid=7

  35. Presence by RJFerret · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Since there have been useful direct suggestions already, some of which have pointed out the liability of not actually feeling "there" by virtue of separation by screen, I have an alternative that can actually help you feel together, as if you are both in the same place (although not useful for kids).

    "Second Life"

    Lots of people in long distance relationships use it to actually feel as if they are together sharing space. Businesses have found the same thing, instead of feeling the "distance" video conferencing confers, everyone feels as if they are in the same room.

    You can present yourself how you desire and decorate how you all desire including have pics of kids on the nightstand. You can have shared experiences like going to live music events, dancing together, attending Burning Life (the virtual Burning Man alternative), participating in games or treasure hunts, watching videos, sailing, amusement parks, exploring different places, etc.

    You can even explore intimacy, including in ways you might not feel comfortable in your own bedroom. (I know a couple who both logged on in their apartment together, one in one room, the other in the living room, who enjoyed certain adult activities that just made them giggle were they trying them in their own bedroom together.)

    The only big catch is there is a significant learning curve, many people log on and try it, to never log on again--so you might not "get it" (it seems more women and stay at home moms do).

    But I can tell you that it's amazing how good a virtual hug feels when someone gives you one and you virtually experience it happening, far more than a verbal "love you" or textual "*hugs".

    I know there are many here who ridicule Second Life, but this is an area in which it excels, and I know of no other similar substitute--plus it's free!

    1. Re:Presence by sigdrifa · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that'll help the kid...

    2. Re:Presence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're fucking crazy

    3. Re:Presence by KahabutDieDrake · · Score: 1

      While I don't agree with the virtual world ideal you are putting forward, I can respect that some people do. However, people like myself prefer video conferencing over a wholly abstracted world. I know some people get the whole "we are together" thing from second life and what not, but I'm much more interested in seeing the actual person, and their body language and expressions. Once you abstract the interface layer, you lose a considerable amount of data.

    4. Re:Presence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Second Life"

      Lots of people in extra-marital relationships use it to actually feel as if they are together sharing space.

      You can present yourself as if you were an 18 year old supermodel nymphomaniac and decorate how you all desire including have various sex toys on the nightstand.

      You can have shared experiences like going to a strip club, dancing naked together, attending Burning Life (the virtual Burning Man alternative), participating in games or treasure hunts such as 'find the teacup in the bedsheets', watching videos of porn, sailing and the other kind of watersports, amusement parks which feature sex acts and freak shows, exploring different places where one can place a sex toy, etc.

      You can even explore intimacy, including in ways you might not feel comfortable in your own bedroom. Assuming your definition of "intimacy" is restricted to jerking off on your keyboard.

      (edited for accuracy)

      But in all seriousness, this isn't a very good idea unless you're a Second Life junkie already. He's looking for a way to see and hear the people on the other end, not to interact via virtual avatars. If he wanted that he could pick any one of a number of MMO's which offer free accounts, and which have much easier to use interfaces.

  36. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by couchslug · · Score: 1

    "If you cared about your family, you wouldn't leave for 6-9 months at a time. "

    I'll put this kindly:
    You're an idiot.

    If you and family are so desperately co-dependent that being gone for less than a year is going to break things, you have much worse issues than being gone for a bit. Economic survival nowadays often means going to where the work is.

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  37. Use ROVIO by Unkyjar · · Score: 1

    I think you'd probably want something like Rovio.

    http://www.thinkgeek.com/geektoys/rc/c7b4/

    1. Re:Use ROVIO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you'd probably want something like Rovio.

      http://www.thinkgeek.com/geektoys/rc/c7b4/

      or better yet, build yourself a texai robot:

      http://www.willowgarage.com/pages/robots/texai/overview

  38. Re:We're a kitchen-focused family. by bsDaemon · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    It's not like he was the only one thinking it.

  39. Faux Portal by Idiomatick · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I would use projectors not screens. Set up a whole wall of the room (or a large bordered portion) to act as a window.

    The goal is to have it close enough to something that people are comfortable with allowing for some suspension of disbelief. Working towards that end have the camera in each room in a similar position to make it as close as possible to acting like a window. Stick a pointless frame/trim on the wall to encourage the illusion. Continuous lines and such when standing and looking into the 'window' from the most common position are important. Similar rooms would help as well. Or common elements ... little things like cameras being the same height off the table are important to make it feel continuous.

    It would not be the same thing as a window of course because of the lack of 3d. One thing you could do though to partially alleviate this would be to use head tracking to determine how close you are to the camera and as you move closer have it zoom to match the right field of view that you would expect. This would help add some realism. Another thing you could do would involve 3d sound recording + reproduction which is doable. It makes the connection feel more real if they can hear you move across the room.

    More expensive the better pretty much. Costly internet connection helps a lot. Good camera and microphones would be good. Good projector would be very important. Fancy business telepresence stuff probably is good and expensive too.

    I'm sure a good driven programmer/engineer could set this up and get it working smoothly with under 20k and a month or so ...... But it'd be pretty damn cool!

    1. Re:Faux Portal by pla · · Score: 1

      I would use projectors not screens. Set up a whole wall of the room (or a large bordered portion) to act as a window.

      ...If he has no practical limit to cost.

      I got rid of my TV and moved to a projector about two years ago (needed a new TV and discovered that a decent projector costs about 2/3rds what a decent TV with half the screen size would). And I absolutely love it, no regrets, but I watch very little TV, basically just one or two hours every other day or so, perhaps four hours on a rainy weekend day.

      And compared to a modern TV, the biggest problem with projectors comes from the cost-per-hour, not the cost up front. Between drawing 800W, and having a $300 bulb rated for only 2000 hours of use, you can realistically expect projector to cost you $500 a year for "typical" American-style TV watching, or over $2000 a year for 24/7 use. And that ignores the increased load on your AC, if you live somewhere warm (800W will easily raise the temperature of a small room by 10-15F). And in the FP's case, multiply that by two.

      So in this situation, even though I recommend to most of my friends that they switch to a projector next time they upgrade the TV, I'd say go with an expensive-up-front 50-60" LCD TV (which still have backlights, but they draw 100-150W and last for over 50K hours). It will save money in the first year alone.

    2. Re:Faux Portal by hcdejong · · Score: 1

      I would use projectors not screens. Set up a whole wall of the room (or a large bordered portion) to act as a window.

      That would require a high-res webcam to work well.

      And you'd need to set it up to reproduce at 1:1 scale, no larger; this means that with a projector you're wasting a whole lot of real estate on irrelevant stuff (i.e. not the person but his kitchen). Having a nice large monitor is good; a projector is overkill, IMO.

    3. Re:Faux Portal by mad_minstrel · · Score: 1

      Overkill? Are you kidding? It wouldn't work well at all. Firstly, most kitchens don't have a huge empty wall to project to. Secondly, they require darkness to work well. Thirdly, the person standing in front of the projection area would cast a shadow, ruining the illusion (you can usually only change the angle by about 15-25 degrees in either direction optically). Finally, there's no place to put the camera - it would have to be placed outside the projection area, which would mean the other side would see you at a sharp angle - which is not what you want. There's also the small matter of having an extremely bright light shining in your kids' eyes whenever they turn away from the picture. Projectors are nice, I use one instead of a TV, but in this case, they're the wrong tool for the job.

      --
      May the source be with you.
    4. Re:Faux Portal by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      Totally true. He should knock out the wall an inset a 50"+ screen.

    5. Re:Faux Portal by Dashiva+Dan · · Score: 1

      Or you could look instead at the newer kinds of projectors like this casio one, or a straight LED Projector that don't have bulbs.
      They're also a lot lighter and smaller than any TV for the same screen size. They're also much cooler to run.

      --
      "lt;dr" is the correct response to most of my posts.
  40. Not very secure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This isn't very secure, but something like http://mebeam.com might work

  41. http://www.ustream.tv/ by TornCityVenz · · Score: 1

    Check out http://www.ustream.tv/ one channel going either way seems like it would work.

    --
    I Need someone to rebuild a Digitech Digital Delay pedal for me....for me...for me...for me.
  42. Re:We're a kitchen-focused family. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so you are the fat one :p

    -- the comic jk cocaine troll

  43. iChat won't time out by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    iChat on the Macs has kept two of our offices chatting for a few months now - without needing to be restarted.

  44. Great and cool idea to share a talk or a drink by Chimel31 · · Score: 1

    It needs some motion detectors on both sides to start the video call automatically when both sides are active and you're set.
    The Asus AiGuru SV1T just wouldn't work for this purpose, you need a real screen and good sound so that any member of the family can approach the screen and start speaking to dad or dad speaks to the family, no handheld device.
    You can use the remote monitor to leave text, audio or video messages visible to the whole family, or use it for any normal "kitchen" use, such as Internet recipe lookup, shopping lists, tasklists, digital post-its, online radio, music, TV, you can even use it at the office during the lunch break, etc. Sounds like there is a potential for a great app.

    I don't see anything creepy with this kind of application, and you can always stop the program if necessary, or mute the sound on any side.
    The only "creepy" thing is that most people talk to the screen, not the camera, so until some manufacturer comes with a monitor with a camera embedded within the screen, you will always have this unfocused side look that is slightly creepy when you talk to a person.

  45. Keep it simple by mattr · · Score: 1

    Some years ago I saw a paper (maybe ACM Siggraph) on something related. A meeting room had a video camera every few feet and the stitched together signal was then projected from a few projectors onto a wall. I made it seem as though you were looking at another room, with a table and the people sitting behind it. Using multiple cameras / projectors (and maybe rotating their orientation) allowed a big portion of the room to be transmitted, while maintaining enough resolution to see their faces, it was all about life size.

    I think I understand what you want, though some people are talking about it being creepy, you might want to arrange for some time of day when two rooms can be connected similarly. This couldn't be done in the kitchen of course. Maybe what you want is something simple. A button can be pushed from either side and it will start the link, then depending on the age of your child they can run and ask you a question. Maybe it is easiest to just have a Mac display on the kitchen table, maybe with a usb button like the griffin powermate to start and stop the connection. All the time on is going to be a distraction to everyone, is the screen going to be on when the kitchen is dark, etc.

    Probably Skype or iChat will be easy and give you high quality. If you can script it with AppleScript and get a PowerMate button then it should be easy.
    Besides AppleScript I'm not sure what you can use but Quartz Composer seems to be able to use the Apple Remote and can be used for motion detection.
    There seem to be packages for the Mac that can do motion detection as part of the video streaming too. Logitech I believe makes a Skype compatible camera on a stalk with high resolution that swivels and zooms to track. That is, it is so high resolution that you can probably pan from your side within the image.

    Hope this helps. My guess is you do not want to have a hot, loud projector running all the time somewhere so forget the augmented reality thing, and also an iPad would be great but it seems too limited camera and software wise and maybe cpu wise now. But check it out possibly you could plug a camera into it and maybe there is a skype app for it. Otherwise hide the computer under the table.. Hope this helps.

    P.S. I found an Applescript Skype library though haven't looked into it at all. Also google for mac os x camera motion, this may help too. Don't see encryption much. Also don't forget to get a dynamic dns account for both computers or else, with ichat you could do without, just use jabber.org to set up the connection.

  46. Words of support by Shoten · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'll be honest; I don't know the solution to your problem. But I've been reading the replies, and between people giving you career advice (without any concept of what your job is, how much you love it, how hard it may be to change it, etc.), disregarding the flamingly, ass-poundingly obvious (normal IM won't work because you have to be close to the laptop, it times out on its own, etc.), or simply telling you that what you're asking about is creepy, I can see you have your work cut out for you.

    Hang in there, man...and remember, this very thing that you are doing, this clear and persistent description and communication of a need, is what drives innovation in the IT and consumer electronics industries. Go for it, and keep it up until you get what you want!

    --

    For your security, this post has been encrypted with ROT-13, twice.
  47. Re:We're a kitchen-focused family. by sjames · · Score: 1

    If you have to point out that it's a joke, it's not funny.

  48. Ojo Video Phone by lawnboy5-O · · Score: 1

    Its super cool and uses basic broadband : http://www.ojophone.com/

  49. ROFL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If your UID is any indicator, you are both much older and much fatter than anyone else in this thread. :)

    1. Re:ROFL by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      I'm older and fatter.

    2. Re:ROFL by sjames · · Score: 1

      While your written skills seem advanced for your age, you really shouldn't be using the internet without your mommy watching.

    3. Re:ROFL by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 1

      See, now THAT is funny.

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
  50. Use your webcam for CCTV by kelarius · · Score: 1

    A quick google search showed several free "Turn your webcam into a CCTV" products that may fit the bill. Most of them allow for internet transmission and while I'm not sure about their longevity, It may be another option.

    --
    Personally I'd rather have my idiots at home glued to the TV than out doing idiotic things
  51. Re:Is your wife tech savvy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Shut up apple fanboi. He's already ruled out standard video conf solutions. Besides, he's hot gay, he has a wife and kids. Why would a heterosexual male buy gay apple gear?

  52. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by sjames · · Score: 1

    And if anyone in Washington actually gave a damn about family values then making someone choose between unemployment in a brutal job market and being separated from family for months on end would be strictly illegal. But guess what?

    So, what would you suggest as an alternative?

  53. WowWee Rovio by ccandreva · · Score: 1

    Not a complete solution, but possibly part of a solution. WowWee (The company that made the Robosapian) has a mobile webcam 'robot', the Rovio

    http://www.wowwee.com/en/products/tech/telepresence/rovio

    They sell it for pretty much your situation. So, whenever it's wondering around, the family can know "Dad is here !"

    1. Re:WowWee Rovio by TerranFury · · Score: 1

      That's really cool. Robot navigation is always a problem, so it's interesting how they've dealt with it.

      If that thing had an LCD on it to make the link two-way, it'd be basically perfect. Well, that and if the camera and LCD were mounted at normal eye level.

  54. Rovio - WiFi Roaming Bot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about the Rovio - WiFi Roaming Bot from thinkgeek. Then you're not limited to the kitchen. 1 way video tho. http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/electronic/c7b4/

  55. The Future... by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    Sounds to me like you're trying to virtually join 2 separate houses together. Perhaps this is the future for all of us.

    Seems to me that always on web-cam solutions have been around for a decade or more. Some number of young women paid for their college educations that way.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  56. Dixie cups are cheap. by Anonymous+Dastard · · Score: 1

    Perfect the cup-string-cup method to the point of full duplex audio and video transmission!

    1. Re:Dixie cups are cheap. by cheros · · Score: 1

      Easy - use fiber for the string to carry the light :-)

      --
      Insert .sig here. Send no money now. Owner may sue, contents will settle. Batteries not included.
  57. x10 or PS3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about www.x10.com cameras? They seem to offer multicam solutions as well. I know they used to have some scary voyeuristic ads but I believe the product to be useful in the right hands.

    Lastly a Sony PS3 with camera will work with your current TV. You can also leave it running Folding@home during the day. It also gives your family a nice BluRay player, web browser, media centre and gaming system. No monthly charges aside from your Internet connection and it has wired and wireless networking.

  58. Be careful what you wish for by petes_PoV · · Score: 1

    you might "walk in" to see something you didn't want to. Or even worse, one of the "home team" might catch something from your (remote) end!

    --
    politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
  59. Re:Is your wife tech savvy? by TerranFury · · Score: 3, Funny

    he's hot gay

    Well-placed typo!

  60. Get over it !! by carlosap · · Score: 1

    Its simple get over it !
    Young birds have to fly.
    Your family doesnt need a big brother facility

  61. Google voice and video chat? by fmayhar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Have you looked into Google video chat? I haven't used it as a regular consumer (I'm an employee) but it seems to work pretty well. It's probably at least worth checking out. http://www.google.com/talk/

  62. Apple iChat by Frightened_Turtle · · Score: 1

    Apple's iChat works excellently for me for long-distance connectivity. We connect via Jabber rather than Apple's MobileMe ($$$$!) service. It works flawlessly, in my opinion.

    --


    Whew! This water sure is cold!
    1. Re:Apple iChat by AvenNYC · · Score: 1

      Yeah, agreed. I posted this below yours as well, but you don't need anything else.

  63. Tech stores in brooklyn by AvenNYC · · Score: 1

    There was this mac store (not apple, but 3rd party) in brooklyn that had 2 stores at one point. They had a big plasma on each store's wall that just had an iChat video connection full screen (all day every day) so they could yell over to the other store and find out if they had something in stock without having to make a phone call or check inventory computers... So... I'd just get a couple mac mini's & flat screens, they come with iChat.

  64. You don't want a video conference solution by Lunch2000 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Video conferencing is for two parties to voice chat, video chat, and share data, etc for a set period of time. I think what you really should think about is a webcam streaming service. There are many sites out there that allow you to embed a live feed from a webcam in a webpage for a small fee. A lot of them will provide the page and give you direct URL and provide the local client software to stream the feed to the web page. You get one for your computer, your wife gets one for the home PC. You watch their page and they watch yours. All of this is designed to run full time as long as the PC is on, can be set to start at boot up, will save your settings and logon info etc. That way you have an always on solution. I don't remember the service I used to use. A quick look at google got me to ustream.com

    1. Re:You don't want a video conference solution by ornel · · Score: 1

      Bambuser. We did that here on my ship using an Axis wireless camera, the Axis driver that makes it appear as an USB connected device and Flash video encoder. It worked perfectly, provided a website with an always-on stream of our ship. Bambuser does not have well-developed privacy controls, but for a single user you just provide them with your password. Each of you gets an account and stream to each other. Plus, you can check your remote kitchen from your mobile. And it's free.

  65. Tandberg by Chris+Colohan · · Score: 1

    At work we sometimes work on projects which span multiple offices. We have used a pair of Tandberg units, one sitting on our desk in California, the other sitting on a desk in New York. It is great to be able to say "hey Bob, can you explain this bit of code?" when you see that Bob is sitting at his desk and not deep in conversation with someone else. Much more productive than resorting to email, phone, or IM all the time.

    Sadly, I've heard that those Tandbergs are super expensive...

  66. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trying to communicate AND keep eye contact will be more of a problem than just using audio. However, you can use video or make it available for use 'sometimes'. I'd use something like Team Speak. You can even put an FM radio transmitter on your family computer so they can use boom box to carry "you" around. The mic could be sensitive enough to not have to be moved around but it's placement would be critical if you do need to use the boom box. Further, the Team Speak solution could allow you to communicate with other friends one on one or in groups.

      For the video side of your question, I'd use simple web cam. I know some web cam vendors supply cam to cam (same vendor) communication applications with their products. Logitech does or has in the past. If you want to get complex, you could use something like D-Link 920 (wireless) in various rooms and perhaps BlueIris on your end to switch from camera to camera.

    Good Luck,
    bob

  67. Slingbox by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    I would look into the Slingbox. It is designed to send full TV channels to remote devices, so it should be able to handle a very good picture with good quality for long periods of time over the internet.

  68. How Anybots' QB let me spend a week working in an by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://technologizer.com/2010/08/17/anybots-qb/

    I, Robot: Life With a Remote Presence Bot
    How Anybots' QB let me spend a week working in an office without working in an office.
    By Harry McCracken | Posted at 8:05 pm on Tuesday, August 17, 2010

  69. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by brusk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How exactly would you write that law? What about people who go to work on research stations in Antarctica, who go to sea on merchant ships, who are loggers in the backwoods? There are lots (or at least a certain number) of jobs in places where you might not want or be able to raise a family. That's just how the world works; you can create policies favorable to families, but you can't change these realities.

    --
    .sig withheld by request
  70. Video Phone by Fieryphoenix · · Score: 0

    Such as deaf people use.

  71. Some options (from $$$ to cheap) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    1. Tandberg or Polycom. I would guess this is out of the question due to price, but it needs to be mentioned since these folks install systems like this all the time and is used in mission critical operations.
    They'll support remote pan&tilt of the cameras, microphones placed throughout your kitchen and lots of nice options. Be prepared to refinance your mortgage, though.

    2. Surveillance cameras + PC on both ends, with a web browser w/ full screen camera view bookmarked. Expensive, and the picture quality will be nowhere near the #1 option, but still very reliable. I have good experience with Panasonic cameras, and they have wireless options available.

    3. Macs with iChat + MobileMe. I'm pretty sure this will Just Work, although I haven't tested how timeouts / reconnects work. Still, with MobileMe or by opening some router ports, you'll be able to log into the computer on the far end and do whatever needs to be done to get it up and running.

    4. If you want something a bit more portable, the iPhone 4 with FaceTime might be an option.

    There are a lot of other options, like using SIP softphones like Eyebeam and setting up a software PBX, but this is probably too much work unless you happen to be very interested in IP telephony :)

    As for webcams, the built-in iSight cameras are good, as are some of the high end Logitech and Microsoft cameras (Microsoft just released a quite cheap + high quality one). Keep in mind, however, that these are built for sitting close to the computer, so it won't be as good for people sitting far away. Option #1 or #2 is better for this, since they're optimized for viewing an entire room.

  72. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by sjames · · Score: 1

    You can do a few things. First, make it illegal to ADD the requirement to a job that doesn't currently have it and you can make it less critical that people accept whatever employment they can get even at the expense of their family.

    There will indeed always be jobs where going away for an extended time is intrinsic. Let them be filled by people who freely choose them (and by freely choose, I do not mean choose or loose everything).

    Then, there's a heap of jobs that could easily be made mostly telecommute but for managers who can't wrap their heads around the idea that someone who isn't miserable in a cubicle farm can still be productive.

  73. Mod Up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (Score:5, Furry)

  74. The answer is Lifesize by gigamonkey · · Score: 2, Informative

    This solution is not cheap but it will give you the best quality for the price and the hardware is really nice. Feature-rich, Full HD Video is Here Full High Definition video communications - Now more accessible than ever Extending the capabilities of the award-winning LifeSize® Express system, LifeSize® Express 220 is an enhanced Full HD video communications system that is both affordable and scalable. Ideal for small working groups, teams or individual knowledge workers who want to take communication over distance to the next level, LifeSize Express 220 has it all. With LifeSize Express 220, you not only get Full HD video quality - 1080p30/720p60 – for natural, realistic interactions at the lowest possible bandwidth, but also crisp, crystal clear data-sharing and an all new digital I/O with Full HD support. Support for dual high definition displays, Full HD camera, and phone or microphone options, LifeSize Express 220 offers the ultimate flexibility. Express 220 brings people together by allowing them to interact successfully across distances. Seeing facial expressions, body language and gestures makes you feel truly connected and understood. http://www.lifesize.com/Products/Video/LifeSize_Express_Series/Express_220.aspx

  75. Pan/Tilt/Zoom IP camera by mattarth · · Score: 1

    ~£60 on eBay: http://www.foscam.com/Products_List.asp?id=128 This may be ANother security camera idea reply for this post, but I have to agree the idea's a good one. It can be left on permanently and constantly streaming. Buy one for both parties and then each can move the camera around to follow what the other is doing and feel much more a part of the scene. It even claims to have a microphone and speaker for talking, but I've not managed to make mine work. Perhaps a more expensive version would be easier to use, although I'm happy with mine. Leave a low powered computer and a low powered screen constantly showing the stream, or maybe you can get the motion detection feature to work on the one I've suggested and set that to wake the screen up whenever it detects you're in front of it. If you can get it to wake the screen then you can probably get it to run a batch script and auto-start a skype conversation. In fact, it sounds like you need a motion detector and a simple web cam with skype at both ends. The only trick is to get the motion detector to wake the computers in both locations. Surely someone here knows how to do that? Good luck!

  76. How about this.. by frinkacheese · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    You just dont take jobs hundreds of miles away from your family...

  77. Core setup for remote maintenance by superswede · · Score: 1

    Having access to the remote machine(s) will be very useful, because there will always be something that breaks and you'll need to admin that computer. I maintain a Windows 95 computer trans-Atlantic via remote VNC access. Basic setup:

    Dynamic DNS:
    1. Signup for a DynDNS.com account. Free.
    2. Install the DynDNS client IP updater on the remote machine. Having it update its IP number at the DynDNS.com account. This will

  78. SIP Videophones? by DrogMan · · Score: 3, Interesting
    A Pair of Grandstream video phones will fit the bill (although they're not Wi-Fi - so run a cable), however can you afford the bandwidth? You're talking about 250Kb/sec each way more or less 24/7 ... That's close to 500MB a day, each way. OK if you have unmetered access, but I've really no idea what your internet conneactions are like... If they meter both ways, budget for one GB a day...

    You'd need to do some port-forwarding in each router (UDP 5060 + the RTP ports) and 'dial' the other site by IP address - it's not hard on the GXV phones and it saves setting up proxys/sip servers/asterisk, etc. If you set each phone to auto-answer then it's not hard to re-establish the link if it fails for whatever reason.

    Failing that, if you want to be PC/Laptop based - look for Ekiga...

    I use a combination of GXV3000 video phones, Ekiga and my Nokia N900 to make/take video calls from my family and in-laws, although I use an Asterisk server to co-ordinate everything and we don't stream 24/7!

    1. Re:SIP Videophones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This kind of thing will use up a lot of bandwidth and eat into the bandwidth of other cable users. Maybe 10 years down we will have sufficient bandwidth so that everybody can do this without overloading the cables. I dont think we are currently ready for this yet.

    2. Re:SIP Videophones? by jesup · · Score: 1

      Or look at a couple of Ojo 900's (also SIP) - not large screens, but rock-solid 30fps even at low bandwidth; they'll run 24-7 and the fee is low (and they're cheap). You can dial the bandwidth down if you want; they'll run a nice experience down to 120Kbps, and can do down to 80K@30fps. At 250K they're great. I know someone who had dinner with his fiance every night, 1000 miles apart, using Ojos. They'd leave them on as soon as both of them were home, in the kitchen while they both cooked.

    3. Re:SIP Videophones? by robertkeizer · · Score: 1

      To avoid massive amounts of bandwidth, you could use two webcams that are independent of the computer, have their own IP address, and set them to only update and show on movement. I would look into some "home security" stuff, as most of those cameras have a small IP stack and it would be straight forward to forward a port.

    4. Re:SIP Videophones? by DrogMan · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry that your country can't cope with 30GB a month per user. That's a fairly standard offering where I am in the UK, and of-course, at least 8 hours of that will be in off-peak and unmetered time (depending on the ADSL package you have)

    5. Re:SIP Videophones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A Pair of Grandstream video phones will fit the bill (although they're not Wi-Fi - so run a cable), however can you afford the bandwidth? You're talking about 250Kb/sec each way more or less 24/7 ... That's close to 500MB a day, each way. OK if you have unmetered access, but I've really no idea what your internet conneactions are like... If they meter both ways, budget for one GB a day...

      You'd need to do some port-forwarding in each router (UDP 5060 + the RTP ports) and 'dial' the other site by IP address - it's not hard on the GXV phones and it saves setting up proxys/sip servers/asterisk, etc. If you set each phone to auto-answer then it's not hard to re-establish the link if it fails for whatever reason.

      Failing that, if you want to be PC/Laptop based - look for Ekiga...

      I use a combination of GXV3000 video phones, Ekiga and my Nokia N900 to make/take video calls from my family and in-laws, although I use an Asterisk server to co-ordinate everything and we don't stream 24/7!

      This brings to mind another issue nobody has mentioned- the IP address. The easiest way to deal with this is to get a static IP address for each end. However, the ISP's might not give you one on a home account (instead requiring a pricey business connection) or might charge a stupid amount of money for one. So if you're going to run this over a dynamic connection, you'll need to also investigate a dynamic DNS setup or some type of local software that can perform a similar function (i.e. update a centralized public web site anytime the IP changes on one of the ends).

    6. Re:SIP Videophones? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      actually @ 250Kb/sec
      That is 31.25kB/sec
      Which is 1.875mB/min
      Equates to 112.5mB/hour
      And totals ~2.7gB/day each way.

      Besides its more like this. Therefore a nice unlimited plan (or one with a high shaping speed plan) would be nice =D

    7. Re:SIP Videophones? by sunwolf · · Score: 1

      I think the ideal solution for the bandwidth would be a triggered system...something that flips on the webcam only when there are actually people in the room. Maybe takes a picture every now and then on standby.

      That said...I can't think of anything that does that. Might be able to use an IR sensor and AutoHotKey to turn Skype on when you pass in through the doorway and off when you go out.

  79. VLC??? by mrchilly0 · · Score: 1

    Personally, I'd just hook up vlc...stream it to a port of your choosing, and then log in from each side...both computers would have 2 instances of vlc running, but it's pretty simple to set up and it's user friendly

  80. 2010 Panasonic Vieracast TV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The 2010 Panasonic Viera TVs have Skype built in, and you get a great new HDTV in the bargain:
    http://www.engadget.com/2010/05/18/panasonic-launches-skype-for-2010-viera-cast-tvs/

  81. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (and by freely choose, I do not mean choose or loose everything)

    So it has to be someone with no debt? or what? You don't seem to have really thought this through. Let's just say I have a position to fill that requires significant time in a remote location with no qualified locals. It is a new position so I won't be changing anyone's job requirements. I advertise the position. Out of the qualified responders, how do I tell who really wants it and who is forced by their circumstances to try and get it? If I find that one applicant will lose their house because of debt if they don't take the job (they're "forced" into it) should I deny them the work and give it to someone that doesn't really need it?

    Since being married I've never travelled away for work, but I've done shift work I didn't want to do. I didn't like regularly leaving my wife and kids alone at night but the extra money meant my wife didn't need a job and could be a stay at home mum while the children were young. If that hadn't been available I would definitely have considered working away for the right pay.

    Nobody is obliged to make your life the way you want it.

  82. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by sjames · · Score: 1

    You REALLY missed the point. The idea is that the social safety net allows the family man to pass your job offer up without losing everything in the process. You just offer the job and you can assume the applicants want the job.

    Nobody is obliged to make your life the way you want it.

    Whatever you say massa.

  83. IvanAnywhere by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.sybase.com/ianywhere/ivananywhere
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IvanAnywhere
    http://news.therecord.com/article/236315

  84. tinychat? by ArcherB · · Score: 1

    You could always use something like tinychat. Just create a room and password protect it so you don't a bunch of horny perverts telling your wife to show her boobs. It may not be completely private as I'm sure that someone at the provider could monitor, but who cares. If someone wanted to hear me talk to my kids about Mickey Mouse or my wife about the electric bill, I pity them because their life must suck.

    --
    There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
    1. Re:tinychat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you could also use their one-on-one service, p2p.tinychat.com. It's fairly straight-forward, uses flash, and all you have to do to connect is setup a bookmark on the desktop. I've left it open while I went out for a couple of hours and came back to it still running, just fine.

  85. maybe you want to look for webcast software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    back in the day i had a vhs camcorder that could play video directly to a TV. if you could find something like that you could plug it in to something like a sling-box. being meant for TV it never times out at least my sling player has never kicked me off even when i forget and leave it running over night. i haven't done much with video streaming but maybe with some playing around you will find you can make something like VLC,windows media player,real player, or quick time work.

    if its a quick time stream and you take RJFerret's idea and use second life then quick time streams can be played in second life so you could avoid having to change programs to use video chat when playing the game and second life can be set up to not auto log you out. one thing about second life though is that well it is free to play having your own house there and being able to set up you own video streams would cost money so it would probably not be free to use it the way you seem to want to but it would be free to just hang out there.

    i would stay away from projectors personally because you want this always on and a any projector i have worked with would not last long being used that way.

    if you do go the rout of setting up your own video server i do agree with who ever it was who told you to use dynamic DNS (sorry cant find who said that now) i would go a step further if there the people on the other computer are non-techies and also set up something like logmein so that if something goes wrong that isn't computer braking you can just log in and fix it your self.

    I'm sorry i could not be of much help but i hope that looking for stuff to do live webcasts rather then video chat leads you to something that will do just what you're looking for.

  86. pan and tilt webcams by rla3rd · · Score: 1

    You could put these to on each side of the connection. Then use ekiga ( or something else similar ) to hold open the connection. At least then you'd be able to follow each other around the room. http://www.buy.com/prod/cobra-digital-pc1000-ultimate-web-camera/q/loc/101/207906616.html

  87. use iPhone4 FaceTime by codgur · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have been on the road for 3 weeks using iPhone 4 daily for over an hour after work talking and interacting with my family. My 4 year old calls me and says "Daddy we're almost home so we can FaceTime." He knows WiFi is required and we only have that at home. Whatever hotel I'm in I make sure I have wifi and if not I bring my AirPort Express to set up the wifi. I do have to reboot the iPhone sometimes before the video works but here's the real reason to use a mobile solution: My family was working on the backyard and they could show me what they were doing. It was awesome. Also my little ones would show me what they are playing with and I would show them the hotel room I was currently in and it was just so much more like being there and not having to be stuck with a 6-8 pound laptop on my chest. It kept me sane and I highly recommend it for anyone with a family in an extended work situation away from home. The little ones forget so easy what you look like / and they are SO much more engaged with conversation when they are stimulated with their eyes and ears. My conversations before with just voice were like (literally): Hi Dad. Hi love you how are you. Good. What's new. Nothing. Bye Dad. It really sucked and there was no bonding. This way the bond was kept and interestingly enough made stronger cause when I got back on Friday my little one said, Dad I wish you go back again. I said why. He said so you can bring me more presents and we can do FaceTime. It was priceless.

    1. Re:use iPhone4 FaceTime by neilah · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm with codgur on this. I have kids that live with their Mom far away (messy divorce, etc.), and this is the setup I'd have them use. Although it's not PCs, and cellphones break, get lost, stolen, etc., this is a significantly better system. Here's why I think so: 1. timothy, the original poster, didn't tell us the age of his kids, but says he has a 'young family', and the kid(s) are old enough to spontaneously say "hey dad check this out". This tells me that they are likely pretty tech savvy, like my kids. And like my kids, lugging a laptop or trying to move a webcam around isn't impossible, but may be out of reach above the height of the kitchen counter. Additionally, my son sometimes wants me to 'see' what he's talking about, and I envision him being able to have a portable camera that he can *point at an object* and say "Hey cool, doncha think?". 2. Another poster talked about portability and eye contact. Very important here. Easier to do if said young person in the family can actually manipulate the object that has the camera and see your reaction. 3. Eventually, an always-on PC, Mac, or other webcam-connected system will break, need a firmware update, or simply rot and get old. Might as well have a solution that has an interface that lets the kids or timothy's wife do this. the iOS, while not perfect, makes this pretty simple. 4. There's an enormous side-benefit to using iPhones: the device will be *with them all the time*. So even when video isn't available, timothy's kids can figure out how to 'dial dad' and share the audio of something cool. Not having to teach them about multiple devices and what they do is worth the cost of jumping up and into the use of an iPhones with contracts. 5. The iPhones can still get used when timothy returns. The kids, having gotten into the habit of calling Dad to share cool moments, may well continue this behavior after Dad gets back. Very cool. In the end, I feel that a form of occam's razor wins out -- the simplest solution is the right one. Use as much off-the-shelf tech that fits the expected use case. Here, your kids will want to do more than just see you, Timothy -- put the power of *showing you* cool stuff into their hands, and you and your wife will be amazed how much of their world they will choose to share with you.

  88. I recommend... by Simulant · · Score: 1

    ... one of those little Atom based mini PCs on each end. They are truly tiny and you can get versions for under $300 each. Now they even have dual core models.

    Stuff the PCs in a cabinet and hook them up to a wall mounted flat screen monitor with built-in speakers and a USB Camera(wide angle)/Mic attached. The bigger the monitor you use, the more "telepresence" you'll experience. You can get a 20" for $120 or less. Then just run Skype w/video, 24/7.

    I'd recommend this setup over a netbook or laptop solution because a) Most laptops really can't handle running 24/7, b) netbooks probably can't either and the screens are too small, c) this is not that expensive... maybe six or seven hundred if you really shop around, and d) You will loose no (or very little) counter space.

    If you plan to suspend/resume these PCs, make sure your camera & mic solution will work after resume. Sometimes they don't.

  89. Pricy but... by Petaris · · Score: 1

    They are pricey but what you want are a couple of Polycom VSX 5000 or similar units. Maybe you can find some on ebay or something. They are nice because you don't need to be technical to run them and they come with an easy to use remote control. You can even control the other units camera direction and zoom. The quality of both the audio and video are very good but, and this goes for all of your solutions, depends on the reliability and quality of your internet connection. You just need a TV or Monitor and an Ethernet connection for the unit. If you can find a couple older models on ebay it will be your best solution.

    http://www.polycom.com/products/telepresence_video/video_conference_systems/room_systems/vsx5000.html

    --
    ~Petaris "The world is open. Are you?"
  90. Simple... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Use two high quality webcams and run yawcam (yet another webcam software). Both PCs will be running web servers that won't time out and each PC keeps it full screen.

  91. Try inexpensive TelePresence solutions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Try some inexpensive TelePresence solutions. The folks at Vu (http://www.vutelepresence.com) have an inexpensive solution payable on a monthly plan and the HD quality is a big plus. You will never get that feel with any desktop solution. Another product I have heard is Vidyo though a lot more expensive....

  92. Sounds like you want something along these lines by entropi · · Score: 1
  93. Use google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We use google chat via web browser. Quality is great. No firewall issues. I have a logitech notebook webcam and achieve from 20-30 fps.

  94. Skype TV's by xnpu · · Score: 1

    There are a number of Skype-enabled TV's these days. Get one on both ends. Simple, straight-forward and nice big pictures.

  95. Hah, not far from my thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From some of the long-distance workers I've known, you don't want the live video feed in the kitchen when you, the absentee dad, turn to drinking your nights away in your bachelor pad. That's a common outcome for those who don't immediately start a new-location family on the side...

  96. Live Messenger. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thats what me and my brother do. I live in idaho. he lives in florida. When i want privacy i drop a dixi cup over my camera. I have a notch clipped out for the camera cord. And the camera sita on top of my monitor. Have your family set theirs up on the counter pointing away from them as they enter in the kitchen so they can drop something over the camera to cover it up. Might want to leave audio on all the time so the kids can see if your monitoring. like on nights you cant sleep. Or you can hear them sneak into the fridge and you can bark at them to get back into bed. Scare the crap out of them too :)

  97. MOST of these suggestions are really lame. by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

    What you want is this: 2 webcams with the right software, and 2 webpages. They can be on the same site (domain). One web page shows the video (with sound) from Dad's camera, the other web page shows the video from the other camera. You set the web pages up to be accessed only via SSL (HTTPS), and allow only a single account to access each page.

    What you get is this: it's always on, so each kitchen can see and hear the other at all times. (If somebody wants to turn their end off, they can always just turn off or unplug the webcam). It's pretty secure. And it's dirt cheap. You don't need a "special" web page or service, just the right code to embed your video. Many webcams today include suitable software for doing exactly that, and if not there are freeware versions available on the Net.

    I don't know why so many people want to complicate it so much. If you really want always-on, then that's a simple and cheap way to do it that has been around for 10 years or so.

    Also, if two of your Macs are new enough to run Leopard or Snow Leopard, you can just put one in each place and run iChat. The video is pretty good, and if it ever goes down it's really easy to show someone how to start it back up.

  98. Skype really is ideal for this by linuxguy · · Score: 1

    I have done something similar for quite a while. Mostly to chat with sub-ordinates in another country. I setup Skype hooked up to a Windows laptop, hooked up to a Logitech Camera I could rotate. (Logitech Orbit AF). I also setup the laptop so that I could remote desktop into it. I configured Skype to auto-answer. Sometimes the connection would drop, but it was super easy to re-establish the connection without bugging the other other party. And the remote desktop ability let me debug any issues remotely, again without bugging anybody on the other side.

    Whatever you setup, make sure to test it well. When you are gone there may not anybody that can fix problems for you. And use good quality cameras. Don't buy anything from D-Link. They make absolute and utter crap. Their cameras are worse than junk.

  99. Why don't you get a Rovio? by the+digital+nomad · · Score: 1

    Why don't you get your hand on a Rovio? Rovio is a groundbreaking new Wi-Fi enabled mobile webcam that lets you view and interact with its environment through streaming video and audio, wherever you are. It embarks a 1 x Head-mounted VGA camera as well as 1 x Speaker and 1 x microphone for 2-way audio. You can control it from your computer (you log in through your web browser) or from any flash enabled mobile phone. This little bugger will make you feel like being at home with your family! They will just need though to get used to you being a few inches plastic big bug... Else a Nokia N900 with built in Skype (built in Skype is COMPLETELY different from any downloadable version of Skype on any other device, as it is perfectly stable) can do the trick: you can do great video calls in a matter of seconds (thanks to the multitasking ability of its Maemo OS you can keep Skype running in the back), see the people you're talking to, and thanks to the built in camera, they can also see you! I have one of those, and I have to say it completely changed my approach of using VoIP. a must try :)

  100. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You REALLY missed the point. The idea is that the social safety net allows the family man to pass your job offer up without losing everything in the process. You just offer the job and you can assume the applicants want the job.

    No, you missed the point. I'm the guy that's taken travel and shift work, the job offer was hypothetical. Where does your safety net come from? The guy that takes the higher paying more inconvenient work pays the higher proportion, having earned more. You want to take it from the people who do take the work (for whatever reason, either willingly or in desperation) and make that work less rewarding for them by giving the proceeds to someone who doesn't want to do it so they can have the rewards of the hard conditions while doing the cushy jobs.

    In other words, you are a thief that pretends virtue by having the proceeds of that theft distributed to others than yourself. It isn't virtuous it is still theft.

    Whatever you say massa.

    Hey, you're the one that wants to take the rewards of my work and give it to others, not because they have need, because they don't want to do that same work. If they aren't sick or disabled I don't feel one bit of obligation to make their life more comfortable at my expense. You are the one that wants to be the massa.

  101. I thought of doing the same... by knarf · · Score: 1

    ...when I moved country. I thought of doing it on a grand scale - which is probably why it did not happen. Think 'two walls at the end of two rooms, two video projectors and two (sets of) cameras'. The projectors would ideally project against the back of the walls, the cameras would be integrated into these walls. The image from the cameras in room A would get projected on wall B and vice versa. Microphones would do the same trick.

    And that is only the beginning. To make a real impact this trick could be tried in 3D... finally something where 3D can be useful instead of just a gimmick. Don't make it to realistic or people might start walking into the wall to get an apple from the table on the other side of the planet...

    --
    --frank[at]unternet.org
  102. THIS by xtracto · · Score: 1

    This is why I still got some hope on slashdot.

    Really, WTF was that with all the noise? (get a new job, forget it, wife banging, etc etc...).

    Parent's post is the solution. Where did all the geeks from slashdot went?

    A quick search through my memory after parent's suggestion lead me to VLC streaming features ( someone posed a relevant question here.

    Back around 2003 when I started reading slashdot I liked the comments because the sentiment around was that *nothing* was impossible with technology.

    Nowadays I just read a bunch of grumpy kids or old guys without any interest in technology :(

    --
    Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    1. Re:THIS by xtracto · · Score: 1

      And just a bit of further information...

      This tutorial describes how to stream some file from one PC to another using VLC.

      You can do the same but only select stream from "capture device".

      You can add this to Hamachi (Log me In), so that you have a secure Virtual LAN

      Once you do this in both computers (so that each streaming is redirected to the other) you will have what you wanted.

      In fact... I should try this now that my wife went to visit her family in Mexico for 3 weeks (we're living in Germany, so we have similar problems to stay in touch with the family).

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
  103. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by sjames · · Score: 1

    That day, it'll come from you. Next year YOUR safety net will come from him. When you're too old to work, it'll come from his children.

    Most of the taxes would come from the people who have very cushy jobs and collect hundreds of times as much for golfing badly as you do logging in the cold.

    Note as well that I was saying that's what they would do *IF* they truly supported family values. Perhaps they actually don't and the Christian right would be better off changing parties or forming one of their own that better follows their moral and ethical principles (or at least one that doesn't actively oppose them).

  104. Cisco wvc80n by i621148 · · Score: 1

    I got one of these when I went back to work and then I just call my wife on the phone. http://www.amazon.com/Cisco-Linksys-Wireless-N-Internet-Monitoring-Camera/dp/B002OHDFOA

  105. Anonymous Coward by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ACN makes an awesome video phone - Iris 5000. It works over an internet connection and is only $29.99 per month for unlimited use and the phone only costs $129. I have two and it's GREAT!!! I know someone who uses them for surveillance in their business and keeps it on 24/7 (it's a conv. store/gas station). It's also rumored to soon have an app to work with the iPhone 4. I've had them for over a year and absolutely love it!! It will depend on your internet connection, but who doesn't have unlimited internet these days. As for the kitchen, I have one in my upstairs office, but the one in my kitchen I had to run/extend an internet line downstairs.....it was very easy. Hope this helps.

    Also, I see there are people giving you hell for leaving your family. Don't listen to them! Do what you need to do. My husband is a Marine and our military does it all the time. Yeah it sucks, but you're an adult and obviously gave this a lot of thought before making your decision. You're asking about how to 'stay in touch' with them - no asking to be 'judged' on why you're going in the first place. I'm sure you wrestled enough with this decision, don't let those who think they need to play puppet master give you a hard time. When they walk a mile in your shoes.......

    Have a great time, make sure to stay in touch with those little ones and ESPECIALLY your spouse and do what you have to do!!! Wish you the best of luck!!!

  106. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That day, it'll come from you. Next year YOUR safety net will come from him.

    In the case of someone that CAN'T work, sure. In the case of someone that just doesn't want to take a particular job, no fucking way. My safety net never comes from such people because I'm willing to do the work. Now in the case of a disabled person, they will never contribute to my safety net and I don't care because they NEED it. It's not about payback, it's about common decency. If you have a job offer that will pay you, if you have any decency you should take it in preference to taking money from your neighbours without providing value.

    Safety nets are called that for a reason. Safety is to protect from danger. Is there danger from accident or illness? Absolutely, it's a valid concept. What you're talking about is people being in danger of being offered a job they don't like. That's a convenience net, not a safety net.

    As for the religious, I've had a college graduate churchie express outrage that her benefits were going to be cut if she didn't take a job. She didn't seem to appreciate that I was doing a far less pleasant job than the one she was being "forced" into and being taxed to pay her way. Here in Australia, no one I know begrudges help to those who need it, but if you are capable of work you are expected to work. That is both our culture and our law.

  107. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No - YOU'RE THE IDIOT!!!!!!!! Our military goes away all the time and wanting to talk with a spouse, child or parent has nothing to do with being co-dependent or breaking things!!!! It has to do with someone who has to do what he has to do and simply wants to keep in touch with family. You obviously have no sense of what a close family relationship or a good marriage is all about!!! I'm sure it was a hard decision for this person to make and he took all factors into consideration. It may not even have to do with economic survival, but maybe passion for his work. How sad is it that someone asks about how to stay in touch with his family because he loves them and asking about how technology can assist with that - this IS 2010 by the way - and all you can do is call him an idiot for wanting that closeness and to be able to still love his family and be 'seen' by his kids. You're just an ASS - how dare you!!! If you have nothing to say to assist don't bother writing anything....IDIOT!!!!!!!!!! You need to look in the mirror DICK.....everyone is fighting their own battles in this world and I'm sure you are fighting yours, but don't put the fact that you're so pathetic on someone else.

  108. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I know you're new here, couchslug, but please don't feed the trolls.

  109. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by sjames · · Score: 1

    There are other considerations as well. For example, children do better when parents have more time for them. Communities only hold together when people have time for them. In the past, we managed that by having single income families. It's true that it was driven as much by sexism as anything else, but there was a beneficial effect.

    In one generation, the norm shifted to two full time incomes (where a simple non-sexist solution would be either 2 half time incomes or one full time with no gender bias for who works and who takes care of the home and community).

    It's no coincidence that shortly after we went to 2 incomes as a standard, we started noticing that neighbors don't know each other. In short succession, we quit letting children wander around the neighborhood (for safety reason because it was a bunch of strangers and empty houses) and then were amazed that given nothing to do but play video games and stuff their faces they got fat.

    Given a choice between a parent continuing to look for work or being forced by desperation to practically abandon their family to provide for it, there is a significant benefit to society if they do the former. Consider the safety net as saving the children if you prefer. Meanwhile, there's probably a single person out there who will be glad to get that job that remained available because the dad didn't have to take it.

    I don't know the economic structure in Australia, but I know in the U.S. that 10% of the population enjoys 90% of the wealth but certainly are not doing 90% of the work that creates the wealth. Meanwhile we have people who are willing to work being told there's no work for them. Apparently we're not all that hard up for labor, so why are we so adamant that people do more of it for less?

  110. Big brother is watching you by GWBasic · · Score: 1

    I think this would really add some color to the statement "Big Brother is watching you."

    Honestly, just buy a bunch of iPhones and use Facetime. I've gotten really sick of Skype interrupting me when I'm using my computer for work. There is this thing called privacy, and I don't think you want to look at your computer to see your parents getting nasty on the kitchen table. Likewise, I don't think you want your parents seeing you stumbling home drunk with some slut that you picked up at the local bar.

    On the other hand, maybe you actually do want to see your parents get nasty on the kitchen table while you get it on with the slut that you just picked up at the local bar. To each his own!

  111. Re:Just don't leave for 6-9 months by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously.

    My wife and two toddlers just spent 4 months in another state dealing with the loss of my wife's grandparents. Cancer sucks. We used Skype and things to keep involved. It was no fun but it worked. I grew up military. Skype would have been great.

  112. Polycom PVX will do the job perfectly. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You could use Polycom PVX software, it is similar to the tandberg as someone mentioned above but it is really cheap (about £80 per license).

    You can do a two way video conference between the two locations as you want and leave it forever. It may at somepoint time out if the connection fails but otherwise it will work a treat. I use it all the time.

    You can download a demo copy that will run for five minutes for free.

    Good Luck.

  113. Re:Is your wife tech savvy? by insufflate10mg · · Score: 1

    He can simply use a VPN/remote desktop connection to fix it. He's asking about how to provide a live video/audio feed over the internet that will handle long periods of uptime and has a quality audio (noise cancelling) and video (pan/tilt). This is Slashdot.