real world columns: real time

The World Cup is long over, but there is one match that still sticks in my mind. I was watching it on a large screen TV in a crowded cafe and late in the second half one of England’s strikers was heading for the opposition’s goal, he got past the first of the defenders and was heading for the penalty area when, in a flash, I knew exactly what was going to happen, I knew that he was going to take a shot and miss, I knew what was going to happen even before I had seen it happen.

What was going on? What quirk of deja-vu or clairvoyance was assisting me? The answer was that it was the crowd further down the room in the cafe, they were also watching the match on another big screen TV but, by some quirk of broadcast technology what they were seeing and hearing was a split second ahead of what we were seeing and hearing at our end of the room. As the striker was approaching the goal we could already hear the disappointed cries from the other viewers and the waning in excitement. At other points in the match we could hear the chants of ‘foul’ just as two players were running to the ball on our screen and the cheering from the other end of the room just before the goal at our end of the room was actually scored.

Now I know that the speed of light is so fast that the signal difference between one end of that room and the other was negligible so where was the delay coming from? It turns out that it was something to do with modern satellite TV and cables and decoders and stuff, in effect technology is so complex that real-time is no longer real-time. You don’t have to find a cafe screening the World Cup to observe this effect, just go into a TV showroom when a large international event is being shown and compare signals on different satellite systems.

What was interesting was the fact that, because of the situation, a minute delay could have such a big effect on the experience of watching the match. Interactions and events are very fragile when it comes to time.

This is apparent on a more regular basis on TV news broadcasts where the news presenter is talking to a foreign correspondent via a satellite link, the round trip for the signal up to the satellite and back again is again miniscule, but it is more than enough to interfere with the normal flow of personal interaction and more than once I have seen news presenters and foreign correspondents stumbling over each others words, then both waiting for the other, then both cutting in again and getting in another tangle. Devotees of the ‘nodding donkey’ school of philosophy will realize that such a series of mutual silences and interruptions could continue ad infinitum.

If transatlantic delays occasionally interfere with communication then what about the delay in getting a signal to the moon and back; one and a quarter seconds, enough to cause complete breakdown in a normal conversation, no wonder NASA introduced the beeps so that astronauts and ground control could do well organized ‘turn taking’ in the conversations.

By the time anything gets to the planet Mars, be it a remote controlled robot or a tourist popstar, the delay for the round trip to communicate with it will be forty minutes. This will make any sort of interaction about as real-time as ancient opposing armies communicating with each other by messengers on horseback.

Interaction, especially technically-mediated, inter-personal interaction, is highly susceptible to even the smallest time delays. Such delays either need to be eliminated or made more manageable by designed systems or communication protocols. And if you move from inter-personal interaction to interaction with technology then you don’t have to go to Mars to get delays of forty minutes in an interaction; you can find them here on Earth. Powderham Castle on the South coast of the UK has a guest wing, and possesses such a sprawling, antiquated water system that guests were advised to start the morning by turning the hot-water tap full on and then going for a walk in the ornate rose gardens.