Hacker News Reader

Well, this brings up the problem, even if you require a password, as an open court, they're required to publish it to allow people to join. Would they simply post it physically somewhere and only local people could access? But then people could share it with bad actors anyway.

Maybe it would just reduce the volume of attacks, not eliminate them.

View on HN

I have to use Zoom at my day-job, and there's quite a few things you can do to try to minimize noise, unwanted guests, etc, including:

- Automatically muting people on entry

- Not allowing people to unmute themselves

- "Locking" the room after the mandatory attendees have joined.

It's not intuitive, but it's not super-complicated, either. I don't think it's a failure of the judge, per se--it's a failure of the court not to provide someone knowledgeable to help setup the meeting.

They could use Zoom for meeting participants, and a separate video streaming service for viewers.

That's what all of the courts I've seen do. They stream the Zoom meeting via YouTube.

Ah, that's a good solution. Although clearly beyond the current capabilities of many departments still...

Zoom also has a Webinar format where only the host can transmit, IIRC.

I think this is a lot more optimal too, as it broadens the availability to those without zoom on their device.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com