Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Wireless Internet Access Uses Visible Light, Not Radio Waves

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 5 years ago | from the no-tin-foil-hats-required dept.

Wireless Networking 264

An anonymous reader writes to tell us that a company has demonstrated a new form of wireless communication that uses light instead of radio waves. "Its inventor, St. Cloud resident John Pederson, says visible-light embedded wireless data communication is the next step in the evolution of wireless communications, one that will expand the possibilities in phone and computer use. The connection provides Web access with almost no wiring, better security and with speeds more than eight times faster than cable."

cancel ×

264 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

light hax (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489335)

im in ur bawx stealin ur photons

But... (3, Informative)

goto begin (1338561) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489345)

Radio waves are part of the light spectrum?

Re:But... (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489485)

They're both part of the electromagnetic spectrum.

Re:But... (0, Troll)

goto begin (1338561) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489583)

This is the technical term for what is commonly called - light.

Re:But... (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489693)

Where and when are microwaves or radio waves commonly referred to as light?

Re:But... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489721)

No, light describes EM radiation in and around the spectrum visible to human eyes. Radio isn't considered light.

Re:But... (2, Informative)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489507)

I think you mean both radio and light are part of the electromagnetic spectrum. "Light" is almost always used to refer exclusively to the visible (and near-visible [IR, UV]) portion of the EM spectrum.

Re:But... (4, Informative)

mpoulton (689851) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489823)

"Light" is almost always used to refer exclusively to the visible (and near-visible [IR, UV]) portion of the EM spectrum.

Well, to be pedantic, scientists often use "light" to refer to higher energy radiation too. It's not commonly used for wavelengths longer than far IR, but it is commonly used for X-ray and even extremely short wavelengths - like "synchrotron light".

Re:But... (1)

nategoose (1004564) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489921)

Not anymore. The US Supreme Court overturned that last year.

Re:But... (5, Informative)

Chris Burke (6130) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490179)

Come on!

Yes it says "light" in the title and ScuttleMonkey-added text. The very first sentence of the actual user submission specifies "visible light". Once that context is established, "light" is a perfectly valid shorthand way to refer to it, and is often (though admittedly not always) used in that way.

Radio waves... (2, Funny)

TruthSeeker (461299) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489355)

... are light, you insensitive clod!

Next step?? (5, Insightful)

PsyciatricHelp (951182) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489431)

Last time I checked light doesn't travel through my wall. Radio waves do.

Re:Next step?? (1)

Thadd.Isolas (936888) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489523)

Re:Next step?? (1)

PsyciatricHelp (951182) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490137)

OK. So energy waves can travel through all forms of matter. Although I think a wave of light that can travel through a foot of concrete may do some damage to whatever is in its path. Plus the whole Line of site thing doesn't appeal much to me.

Re:Next step?? (3, Informative)

DragonWriter (970822) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489539)

Last time I checked light doesn't travel through my wall.

Visible light doesn't, probably. But "light" is a term that can be used to refer to the whole of the EM spectrum.

Re:Next step?? (1)

feldicus (1367687) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489811)

Your house is radioactive! Run!

feldicus

Re:Next step?? (4, Interesting)

snowraver1 (1052510) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489853)

I read an article about this or similar technology several months ago. Sure, light doesn't do through walls, but that could be an advantage. You could setup a wireless network that asctually stops at the building perimiter.

The other article (not sure if this one does didn't read it) indicated that this technology could be incorporated into LED lighting. Basically your overhead lighting would become the access point. There would be recievers in the room as well that would pick up your transmissions and presumably put them on some sort of physical media (cat6, fibre). Pretty neat, but to me sound extremely finicky.

-- Snow.

Warning! (4, Funny)

Fjandr (66656) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489371)

Looking at the access point can cause severe retinal burns. We are not responsible for retinal damage or permanent blindness as a result of using our product. Thank you, and have a nice day.

Re:Warning! (4, Funny)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489565)

Yeah, but retinal damage only occurs when using P2P protocols to share pr0n according to this flashy brochure the preacher man gave me.

Re:Warning! (2, Funny)

feldicus (1367687) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489967)

One has to wonder about the feasibility of a protocol that strobed the access point in time with illegally-downloaded music.

feldicus

Re:Warning! (2, Funny)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490093)

Please be advised that person prone to seizures should not be in the same room as the access point as the natural oscillations in the carrier wave have been shown to cause seizures.

WARNING! (5, Funny)

LiquidCoooled (634315) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489373)

WARNING!
Do not look at the internet with your remaining eye.

Re:WARNING! (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489455)

I got that warning after my first goatse encounter. I've been really cautious since.

Problem? (1)

No2Gates (239823) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489387)

Light does not work so well when it's being blocked.
Light does not do well when in the presence of brighter light.
Light DOES provide better security NOW. But that's just a matter of time.
It just does not sound practical.

Re:Problem? (1)

Jeoh (1393645) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489597)

Light does not do well when in the presence of brighter light.

I'm in a dark basement, you insensitive clod!

Re:Problem? (1)

duguk (589689) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490085)

This won't be too useful to you then, I'm pretty sure this 'new technology' requires some sort of lighting system, and I doubt any of us will be keen on that.

huh? (2, Funny)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489389)

Radio is just another color of light--a very, uh, extremely red color.

Re:huh? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489467)

Radio isn't another color of light, color only applies to the visible spectrum. Way to correct a technical error with another technical error.

Re:huh? (5, Funny)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489697)

This is where you are wrong, sir. And you can test it yourself. Create an HTML document and set the background color past "#FF0000". Crank it up to "#ZZ0000" and your monitor will then begin blasting radio waves at your face.

Re:huh? (5, Interesting)

The Master Control P (655590) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489849)

Use Tempest for Eliza [erikyyy.de] and it'll transmit radio at you for real rather than generating a minor html error :P

Re:huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489975)

Somebody mod this guy insightful! I just tried this and now I hear nothing but static when I hold my portable radio near my monitor. Wow!!

Re:huh? (4, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490113)

Yes, it seems like they're drawing a couple suspect distinctions in this article. They talk about "light" as being very different from "radio" even though they're both EM radiation, and they talk about "using light" as very different from "using fiber optics", even though it's really just a difference of medium.

I don't really see it working out. We already use that portion of the EM spectrum for... you know... seeing. I guess you could claim that being easily blocked (e.g. by walls) is an advantage, but for most people in most circumstances, being able to pass through lots of materials would be a greater advantage. If you really want tighter security, then instead of relying on walls to block the signal, this technology could be improved by creating some sort of conduit that would go directly from one point to another. Like some kind of fibrous, wiry, cable-like structure between them. I'm sure that would be much better than fiber optics.

oops (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489395)

oh, dang, someone stuck their hand in the laser bea-

It's called free space optics (5, Informative)

eobanb (823187) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489405)

It's called free space optics. The technology has been around a long time, in fact, and for a while it was fairly common on laptops. It was called IrDA, and though it was fairly short range you could use it to transfer files, establish a TCP/IP connection, etc.

I remember playing a Starcraft game with an iMac G3 and PowerBook G3. A friend and I used AppleTalk over IrDA. Unfortunately it was rather awkward since they had to line up, but we figured out you could bounce the infrared beam with mirrors. So we didn't need ethernet, we could play wirelessly...this was in 1998, long before 802.11b became mass-market.

The article is even more amusing than that. (2, Interesting)

khasim (1285) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489569)

From TFA:

The technology could be exciting for cell phone users as well. Cells phones use radio waves that can travel through walls and be intercepted. That means they cannot be used for sensitive conversations, such as those involving national security or banking transactions.

Light does not travel through walls and the LVX could offer a more secure conversation, Pederson said. He said cell phones already have the technology needed to adapt to LVX. He is looking for a cell phone manufacturer to develop a phone using his technology.

So the cell phones equipped with that would NOT operate with any cell tower that was out of visual range. Doesn't that kind of limit your conversations with your bank to, essentially, being inside the bank building?

"This would be like having fiber optics without the fiber, coming into your hand-held device or telephone," Pederson said. "The security implications are numerous."

No. Because the fiber cable can be punched through walls and such. It does not require line of sight to work. But it works at the speed of light. Which is why it is preferred.

Re:The article is even more amusing than that. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489669)

Uhhhh...radio waves propagate at the speed of light too, being made out of light and all.

Re:The article is even more amusing than that. (3, Informative)

jae471 (1102461) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489801)

Uhhhh...radio waves propagate at the speed of light too, being made out of light and all.

However, higher-energy light has a higher frequency. Higher frequency = higher bandwidth. (and, not-so-coincidentally, higher power consumption)

Re:The article is even more amusing than that. (1)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490023)

There are radio waves above "light" and below "light" on the spectrum. It's just a matter of how fast you shake your electrons.

And the real genius of fiber right now is being able to multiplex sub-frequency lamdas thru a single fiber. Not simply increasing the freq. indefinitely.

Re:The article is even more amusing than that. (1)

nextekcarl (1402899) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490253)

I thought radio was just below "light"?

http://lot.astro.utoronto.ca/images/spectrum.png

Re:It's called free space optics (1)

Chabo (880571) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489665)

Most PDAs at the time (like when Palm was in its big heyday) supported IrDA too.

Re:It's called free space optics (1)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489923)

Had you been thinking, you could have sold IrDA switches in the form of a box of mirrors. Or IrDA hubs in the form of disco balls.

8x faster than cable (1)

electrosoccertux (874415) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489413)

Means little, when the current cable speeds can basically be infinite. You know how you have all those TV channels traveling through the same wire? They can do the same with the internet communications as well-- just use multiple channels in parallel.

8-channel cable DOCSIS spec [wikipedia.org]

Or maybe they aren't talking about cable-internet specifically; I only skimmed TA :)

Re:8x faster than cable (2, Informative)

Chabo (880571) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489575)

They didn't mention speeds at all in the article, but on at least one occasion when he used the word "cable", he meant fiber-optics:

If it works out as Pederson plans, his project would replace the need for fiber optic wires that run underground and in buildings. The cost savings alone in construction and wiring make it impressive, St. Cloud Mayor Dave Kleis said.

âoeRight now, we are going through a tremendous amount of fiber optics. If this can move and transmit with light rather than cable, there is significant savings in that alone,â Kleis said.

Now, given that they're essentially the same technology, I can't see how this would be faster than fiber. But if by "cable" when talking about speeds, he does mean DOCSIS, then that's easy. 10 Gigabit ethernet is already more than 20 times faster than EuroDOCSIS 3.0, 8-channel, and most varieties of 10GbE run over fiber.

oldnews (3, Informative)

rpp3po (641313) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489423)

For how many decades does my university use laser links to our dorms? For how many decades do we have infra red data transmission, e.g. in remote controls?

Light, huh. (2, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489435)

Has this guy never seen snow? Or fog? Or rain? Does he live in a desert? Two words: Atmospheric absorption.

Re:Light, huh. (1)

Xtravar (725372) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489491)

Two words: error correction!

Semi-kidding.

Re:Light, huh. (1)

megamerican (1073936) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489543)

Considering that St. Cloud is in Minnesota, it is very likely he has seen all of those things.

This product would be tailored to applications inside buildings, where those things don't happen too frequently. This technology is perfect for security type applications.

Re:Light, huh. (1)

orclevegam (940336) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490257)

Or they could *gasp* run a fscking cable and not worry about a glorified IR link. Once you've gone to something like IR you're already dealing with a limited area so mobility isn't really a prime factor (ok, yeah, you could string a whole sequence of these along the roof and work out some system to migrate from one to another as the person walks around the building, but that's not exactly practical), and there's still a chance that someone could eavesdrop on the network by say strategically placing a mirror to bounce the signal out a window. Just running a length of Cat6 gives you all the security and then some.

Re:Light, huh. (1)

goobenet (756437) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490029)

Um, this guy lives in central Minnesota. The temp average this past week was -10 degrees. Of anyone, he would know what snow/fog/rain is... That is to say, St. Johns University isn't really known for turning out good scientists.

Re:Light, huh. (1)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490123)

Thermal weapon sights and FLIR systems see thru fog, rain, and snow quite well. If the wavelength is smaller than the particle it's going around, you don't see it.

All media have distortion and absorption problem, it's up to the protocol layers to deal with that. The mufuckin microwave slows your 802.11 throughput...

New meaning.... (1)

Koshari (1435453) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489441)

to hearing lights out!!!

Light light light light (-1, Offtopic)

Gizzmonic (412910) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489463)

It's Friday, it's 5 o'clock, so what the hell...I'm trolling!

See you suckers at the bar (assuming my car ever gets out of the shop).

Then, after we've had a few beers, let's pick up some skanks [photobucket.com] and make them happy with our penile dexterity!

Re:Light light light light (1)

wealthychef (584778) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489643)

OMG, that is unbelievable! Thank you.

Ghost Hunters... (1)

tsnorquist (1058924) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489525)

I don't think this technology is going to work too well for Jason, Grant, and the rest of the Ghost Hunters.

What about my favorite activity? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489527)

! I like radio-waves. With this I can't be under my sheet with a flashlight and read a scary book on my laptop.

And so what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489531)

What exactly would be the advantage? It seems like it would be so very susceptible to interference or disruption that it wouldn't be useful over any distance. Straight-line only, likely, as well, and so not very useful even from component to component of a computer on a desk. sure, fine, it might make a good portable-to-portable connection, but it won't replace the longer wavelengths whatever the bandwidth advantage because so much is opaque to visible light.

Now I guess we need ... (4, Funny)

SWPadnos (191329) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489555)

Tinfoil glasses :)

Re:Now I guess we need ... (1)

inject_hotmail.com (843637) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489761)

Tinfoil glasses :)

I'm already prepared. Remember when Coke (or was it Pepsi) put out those flexible el-cheapo glasses back in the 80's?

I still have mine. A pack-rat's vindication.

Re:Now I guess we need ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26490025)

No you idiot, you need transparent aluminum glasses!

Don't we already use wireless light for data? (1)

solder_fox (1453905) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489605)

Doesn't some quantum cryptographic and military stuff use wireless light for data transfer already?

IR networking (1)

soupforare (542403) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489607)

Didn't we already go through this idea a couple times? Even to the point of HP(?) having incredibly ridiculous multi-emitter bulbs for computer lab installs and things?

Re:IR networking (1)

SpicyLemon (803639) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490129)

Great.... now I'll need line of site to my router?

Didn't we learn our lesson here already?

I know I didn't!!!

Those IR remote control cars are sooooo much more fun than the stupid radio control cars.

Re:IR networking (1)

laughingskeptic (1004414) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490143)

Yes, there have been a couple of rounds of people doing this with infrared going at least as far back as the early 90s. Who had the commercial product that looked like an agry spider that you put in the corner of your room?
However, none of the old infrared stuff as far as I know used modern cell techniques like TDMA. Maybe that is what this guy has been working on. Or maybe he is a rich clueless tinkerer ...

Frequency (1)

ypctx (1324269) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489615)

So what's the frequency, Kenneth?

Everything Old Is New Again (1)

longbot (789962) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489619)

We had this back in 1994. It was called "IR modems".

He needs to think twice (2, Insightful)

omnilynx (961400) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489631)

There's a reason we don't already use visible light signals to send wireless data (except if we're lost in the wilderness, I guess). It's VISIBLE. Can you image how annoying it would be to have light flickering around you all the time from your communicating devices? One of the primary advantages of the various bands we use (radio, infrared, etc.) is that they don't interfere with our normal operations: they're invisible.

We've got plenty of bandwidth that doesn't interact directly with the human body. Why don't we stick to that instead of trying to use something that does?

Re:He needs to think twice (1)

Limb (1047158) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489887)

. Why don't we stick to that instead of trying to use something that does?

Because that wouldn't make for a very slashdot worthy story, now would it? Useful information finding itself onto the front page? BLASPHEMY!

Re:He needs to think twice (4, Insightful)

CaptainPatent (1087643) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489939)

Can you image how annoying it would be to have light flickering around you all the time from your communicating devices?

You know that thing you looked into when you typed your message. Be it a CRT, LCD or Plasma, it flickers at 40-120 times per second.

Communication applications would flicker even faster to the point you wouldn't notice unless you sent a constant string of 0's or 1's.

Don't get me wrong, I still think it's a bad idea for line of sight and other interference reasons, but flicker is near the bottom of that list.

Re:He needs to think twice (4, Funny)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490067)

Can you image how annoying it would be to have light flickering around you all the time from your communicating devices?

Oh, cut the bleeding heart crap, will ya? We all have our switches, lights, and knobs to deal with. At this very moment I surrounded by hundreds of thousands of blinking and beeping lights, blinking and beeping and flashing and flashing and I can't take it anymore! They're blinking and beeping and flashing! Why can't anyone stop it? Why doesn't someone pull the plug?!

This FP for GNaA (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489649)

do, or in3eed what bleak futu8e. In

Ronja (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489671)

These guys claims are simply fraudulent. This technology has been around for decades.

Ever seen one of those new fangled "remote control" things that terrorvisions have ?

The open source version is at http://ronja.twibright.com/ [twibright.com] and I bet there is more than a striking similarity to the equipment in TFA.

May I be the first to ask... (1)

inject_hotmail.com (843637) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489711)

...what are you doing on slashdot on Friday at 5:30?

no wait, I'd rather ask why it's only 8 times as fast as cable...which cable? I have a 1gb cable in front of me right now.

Besides that, I predict this isn't going to revolutionize anything. It might work in specialized situations, but it's not going to replace cables in walls. Ever.

Re:May I be the first to ask... (1)

Duradin (1261418) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489859)

In my timezone it's only 4:30 you insensitive clod!

ACHTUNG! ALLES LOOKENSPEEPERS! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489713)

Das internetzwerken ist nicht fuer gefingerpoken und
mittengrabben. Ist easy schnappen der springenwerk,
blowenfusen und poppencorken mit spitzensparken. Ist nicht
fuer gewerken bei das dumpkopfen. Das rubbernecken
sichtseeren keepen das cotten-pickenen hans in das pockets
muss; relaxen und watchen das blinkenlichten.

Been done before (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489775)

http://ronja.twibright.com/

IBM had an IR network (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489837)

Didn't IBM have an infrared system that would link a workgroup? It's been many years, but I vaguely remember something like this.

And why isn't this guy using IR???????

802.11 (1)

koma77 (930091) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489865)

The IEEE 802.11 specification has defines an IR PHY as an alternative to RF. I've never seen it implemented though...

Rain? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489879)

What happens when it rains?

Re:Rain? (1)

HTH NE1 (675604) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490131)

What happens when it rains?

I think rain is wet, but then I think that fish is nice, so who am I to judge?

Warm air bends light (1)

Henk Poley (308046) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489933)

Andy Tanenbaum has a nice story about that. On a conference they wanted to use a modulated laser to beam an internet connection to another building. Except they calibrated the target at night, it tested fine. But during the day the air would warm and break the connection. He found it rather odd they didn't just use a cable the next day, but the management insisted on using the broken technology. Didn't work they entire conference.

Been tried, won't work (3, Informative)

Ancient_Hacker (751168) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489945)

It's been investigated but the technology just won't work out. Light sensors have a strong speed/intensity tradeoff. Even with a several-inch wide lens you can't collect enough light to drive a sensor at more than a few kilobits/sec. And people hate to keep pointing the sensor at the opposite party.

And if the room has LED or CCFL lighting the interference from those is mighty intense.
   

Re:Been tried, won't work (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26490315)

Won't work? so the guys at RONJA [wikipedia.org] are just imagining running 10Mbit/s full duplex over well over a mile using red LEDs and 4" chinese loupe lenses?

Not exactly new (1)

tdwMighty (1453161) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489957)

This isn`t exactly new technology.

1 [blogs.com]
2 [moeroshop.net]
3 [jdresearch.com]

Line of sight. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489959)

Yeah, that's great and all, but every practical application I can think of for wireless connectivity has a high potential for temporary or permanent interruption of line of site access from the device to any possible access point.

Now not only can an annoying coworker come lean over the cube partition to tell me a boring story, they can cut off my ability to ignore them by surfing the web. Thanks, new pointless technology!

Quantum Encryption (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26489983)

Yes, quantum encryption! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_cryptography

Does Double Duty... (1)

DieByWire (744043) | more than 5 years ago | (#26489999)

If your house is on fire, the network goes down.

To paraphrase Sun....The Network is the Smoke Detector.

Dammit, Randall! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26490039)

Get out of my head!

This is stupid (1)

KiwiCanuck (1075767) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490059)

This will never get approval for obvious reasons. The spectrum is so large. Why on Earth would you try to use the extremely narrow band used by our vision?

Ah yes, another wheel reinvented. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26490115)

Let's not rain on this guy's parade and mention the infrared implementation of wifi. IrDA, RONJA and other essentially point-to-point technologies have been aroud for a while too. So, apart from the usual gushing, what makes this really different from what was there already, except maybe not very well known?

bad summary (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490149)

An anonymous reader writes to tell us that a company has demonstrated a ...

Correction:
"An marketing drone writes to tell us that his company has demonstrated a ..."

There, fixed for ya ;)

Reboot the sky... (1)

polyomninym (648843) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490167)

I hear that cloud computing is as fast as lightning. On Cloudnet, hops are HOT!

"inventor" (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490199)

My foot, people were doing this decades ago in the analog world.

If you include fiber.. its digital too.

Ronja (1)

mcbridematt (544099) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490231)

I recall hearing about Ronja [twibright.com] on /. years ago, and they have deployed it for a wireless net.

Mirrored Ceilings? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26490279)

Great, every geek's house will have mirrored ceilings now.

Aw, Common... (1)

ittybad (896498) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490283)

Hey, turn off your damn flashlight, your f**king up my internet!...Yes, the strobe light too. Turn it off.

Strange comment... (1)

Drasil (580067) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490293)

From TFA:

"If I can take this to the next step, I think think it is going to be good for our country," Pederson said.

Quite apart from the fact the country isn't explicitly mentioned in TFA (I assume it's the USA), why would someone say this? Not good for humanity, or for the communications or IT industries, but good for a specific country? Strange.

Best holonovel ever. (1)

stonedcat (80201) | more than 5 years ago | (#26490295)

Photons be free!

HAM Radio Operators have been doing that for years (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#26490305)

Modulating laser light to transmit information, I mean...

http://www.earthsignals.com/Collins/0036/index.htm

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>