this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2024
313 points (99.4% liked)

Technology

58550 readers
5546 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 70 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] rimjob_rainer@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (4 children)

WiHi is already taken in Japanese for WiFi. They write WiFi but can't pronounce WiFi (there is no Fi sillable), so they say WiHi. Source: I lived in Japan for a while.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 6 points 1 day ago

Kinda weird that their only syllable with F sound is Fu, which goes in the Ha-He-Hi-Ho column

[–] mindaika@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Fogle@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

They have plash speed wifi

[–] Evil_Shrubbery@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago

Why not Willow

[–] dan@upvote.au 5 points 1 day ago

How is this different to HaLow?

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 90 points 2 days ago (8 children)

Ensuring that the system complies with industry standards and integrating security measures for cross-technology communication are also necessary steps, Gao adds.

This is absolutely a huge factor that could make or break the technology if they don't do this perfectly. This could be the single most important part of the tech.

2.4 GHz is super saturated. The last thing we need is long range i.e. large footprint signals in already saturated spectrum. How this technology is deployed should either be not at all, or very carefully, to prevent widespread interference with existing WiFi devices. This spectrum is already on the verge of being complete trash. Please please do not be deploying more stuff on 2.4 spanning an entire "smart city."

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 41 points 1 day ago (3 children)

I actually ditched 2.4 gigahertz Wi-Fi on my home network entirely for this exact reason. If a device is not compatible with 5 gigahertz Wi-Fi, it doesn't get purchased.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago

I wish I could but too many devices still require it

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 31 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It doesn’t just benefit you. You’re benefiting the current users of that spectrum that for one reason or another might not be able to switch.

I suspect most users though couldn’t tell you what frequency their network uses let alone the devices on it.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yup, I have one device that's stuck on 2.4GHz, my Brother laser printer. It works fantastically otherwise and it has an Ethernet port, but I haven't bothered to run cable yet to it. I suspect a lot of people have that one device they'd rather not replace, which is still on an old wifi standard.

So I just make sure to have a simultaneous dual-band setup. Everything else uses 5GHz, and the 2.4GHz band exists for that one device, or if I'm on the opposite side of the house or something. I use fancy networking stuff though (Ubiquiti APs), your average person would just be confused at why the internet is sometimes slow (i.e. when the printer wakes up).

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago

While my printer only supports 2.4GHz, it’s always been on Ethernet

But too many smart home devices and media streamers, even after making an effort to stick with local IoT meshes.

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Anyone with a NAS will immediately notice that they are on 2.4GHz because it will take several times longer to transfer files.

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think users who know what a NAS is probably know that information already. But true, yes!

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Some of us know what a NAS is, but aren't fortunate enough to afford one

[–] DogWater@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

Indeed. Hello poorish brother

[–] circuscritic@lemmy.ca 19 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Do you live in a high density urban environment?

Because if so, that totally makes sense, and the other benefit of 5GHz/6GHz not traveling too far outside your apartment or condo wall, is pretty nifty as well.

But if you live in a house in the suburbs, man, that is commitment well outside of necessity, or convenience. Not saying it's bad choice per se, just seems unnecessarily burdensome IMO.

I'm not OP, but I also live in a single family house in the suburbs and actively avoid 2.4-only gear. I do have one stubborn device on 2.4GHz though, my laser printer, so I have to keep buying simultaneous dual-band gear until I get around to running Ethernet cable to it.

[–] shortwavesurfer@lemmy.zip 9 points 1 day ago

I live in a single family house, but the area has quite a few single family houses packed pretty close together. So there's still a lot of traffic on 2.4 GHz.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

This spectrum is already on the verge of being complete trash.

Radio shouldn't be used when avoidable. It's for emergencies, aviation, hiking, short-range communication for convenience maybe. Phones - yes.

But providing internet connectivity via radio when you can lay cable is just stupid.

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 11 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I mostly agree with you. I find it really weird how I live in a world where all my Internet is being run through 5G cellular for political and social reasons and not for technical ones. Due to the monopoly on the cables, it’s actually much cheaper here to buy 5G home internet. It seems unnecessarily complicated and choosing to use a shared medium for no reason. It’s just the politics.

In case you’re not from the States, we have a monopoly pretty much everywhere for Internet services.

With my 5G I have unlimited data, and it’s 300 down 44 up on a good day. It’s perfectly serviceable if you can live with increased latency.

we have a monopoly pretty much everywhere for Internet services

Fortunately, that's not true everywhere, and municipal fiber is becoming more and more common.

5G home internet

The problem here is latency. It's entirely sufficient for most web browsing and video streaming use-cases, but it sucks for multiplayer gaming and other interactive use-cases (e.g. video calls). So while it's probably a solution for a lot of people, it's not really a replacement for physical cables.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Brown_dude69@lemmy.world 32 points 1 day ago (2 children)

This will still be not accessible in my room!

[–] hakunawazo@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Nothing a hammer drill, CAT.7 cable and an access point couldn't fix.

[–] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 15 points 1 day ago

I mean, if you insist on sitting in the fridge what do you expect!

[–] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 23 points 2 days ago (2 children)

I'm kinda looking forward to seeing how this pans out. Personally, I'd want to use it to make small, local hobby networks; kinda like how it used to be that basically anyone with a phone line could start an ISP.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

Me too but it’s not well suited for a use case like that. Think of it for data logging and control of remote devices. Maybe you have a battery powered sensor in a field to track moisture levels, or a light switch in an outbuilding that you want to make sure is shut off without walking out there.

Similar networking that is more accessible to consumers might be Zigbee, z-wave or Thread.

Matter/Thread is the latest consumer standard, and is supported by major players like Apple and Amazon (don’t remember if Google is still on board). its strengths include standardized device type profiles (so every light switch has the same definition of off and on) and well-defined integration between Thread (local wireless mesh network) and Matter (IoT protocol over Ethernet/WiFi) making it more likely that everything works together. It has a lot of potential, but has been slow to roll out.

[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Hell yes. Perhaps an interconnected network of mesh nodes could become an alternative FOSS internet within our lifetimes.

[–] essteeyou@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (8 children)

Maybe I’m being overly paranoid (this is Lemmy, after all), but doesn’t this seem like a step toward something troubling?

  1. Almost all of our devices are designed to use WiFi. Just try finding a laptop with an ethernet port, or a phone or tablet with wired connectivity. You can get adapters, sure, but they’re not standard anymore. I wouldn’t be surprised if game consoles eventually drop wired options altogether, or charge extra for them—like Sony does with the PS5 disc drive.
  2. ISPs have a track record of trying to control our internet experience—remember the fight over net neutrality? They’re always looking for ways to monetize data and restrict what we can access online.
  3. With long-range WiFi on the horizon, ISPs might find it cheaper to install one powerful broadcast device per neighborhood, similar to how 5G towers are deployed.
  4. And when that happens, it’s not that features like fiber to the home or port forwarding are gone, but they could be locked behind an extra fee. Want direct access to your own network settings? That might come at a premium. Even access to certain websites could become conditional on paying more, or worse, dictated by someone else’s agenda.
[–] turmacar@lemmy.world 45 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What are you talking about?

This is not about streaming to a laptop or Internet access. This is about a long range, low power, low bandwidth network using 2.4GHz. It's using 2.4GHz, like everyone else likes to, because it's the "free" signal band that you don't have to pay to license. It's for sending the message "Sprinkler head 1039A is leaking" from a solar panel powered transmitter without having to run a data cable or network repeaters.

It's competition for Zigbee/Z-Wave/Matter. Not the herald of the ISP crackdown Armageddon.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It may also allow some sort of meshnet-based Usenet (no binary groups), just saying.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] amorpheus@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago

And when that happens, it’s not that features like fiber to the home or port forwarding are gone, but they could be locked behind an extra fee. Want direct access to your own network settings? That might come at a premium. Even access to certain websites could become conditional on paying more, or worse, dictated by someone else’s agenda.

They can do that right now. If this new wireless option is standardized, it would seem less prone to ISP shenanigans to me. Just a question whatever functionality makes it into the standard in the first place.

[–] catloaf@lemm.ee 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Laptops with Ethernet are still pretty common. I just bought one recently. At work, we buy a lot of them. But I don't think smartphones ever had integrated wired networking.

But that aside, what you're describing is already happening. Wireless network deployments are much, much cheaper than running wire to each building. In semi-rural areas, WiSPs are pretty common. And 5G for home Internet access is pretty common in high-coverage areas. And as time goes on, the ISP-provided equipment is more locked down.

But I don't think those things are related.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Brkdncr@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think the article is explaining that this is really just modifying wifi protocols to work over LoRa, to reduce LoRa costs.

This will probably only be beneficial to people currently using LoRa.

[–] jaxxed@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I thought that LORA was optimized for low data throughput? Running WIFI over such a link would suck.

[–] Preflight_Tomato@lemm.ee 1 points 5 hours ago

Also isn’t LoRa proprietary/patent encumbered?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 9 points 1 day ago

This article leaves me with more questions than answers

load more comments
view more: next ›