You may think that any trial which features mixed-up videotapes would be a generally exciting one, but the Enron Broadband trial appears to have bogged down in a bunch of boring technobabble. Tom points to this Chron story from last week in which even the reporters are having a hard time maintaining interest.
On the stand Tuesday was jargon-dependent computer specialist John Bloomer. It was his third day of testimony, and for most of morning he was questioned by Enron Task Force prosecutor Ben Campbell.
Campbell took Bloomer through statement after statement made at a critical January 2000 Enron conference for stock analysts to ask about the truth of what was said.
It was no more exciting in the afternoon when defense attorney Per Ramfjord took over. Ramfjord is so well-versed in technology that the courtroom can become Silicon Valley when he gets going with a geeky witness. Bloomer sometimes answered enthusiastically with something like: "We were late. Whether it be MPLS over ATM, whether it be precedent bit over IP." Don't ask.
So the jurors and alternates, if they've stayed fully awake, know what a hop and a POP are in the tech world, may know the difference between quality of service and quality of stream delivery, and likely know what media cast and media transport are.