this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2024
275 points (98.6% liked)

Technology

58692 readers
3876 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
 

Finally, the singularity has happened.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 18 points 6 days ago (5 children)

They keep reiterating "faster, faster". But the discussion is "laser" vs. "radio".

Surprise: both travel at the speed of light. Both are the same speed.

Hmmm.

Are they afraid of having to explain "bandwidth"?

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 19 points 6 days ago (1 children)

When talking communication, most people think of the speed with which a unit quantity of information is transmitted, not the latency of that transmission.
Referring to bandwidth as the speed of a communication system is pretty normal, even for people who know how to use the term bandwidth.

[–] NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago (2 children)

people think of [...] not the latency of that transmission.

And when that latency goes up from a few millis (from google to you) to, let's say, 10 minutes (from mars to earth), then they would start to notice it :)

[–] ricecake@sh.itjust.works 5 points 6 days ago

Oh, certainly. But common language has a term for high latency already, it's just not speed related. Everyone knows about a laggy connection on a phone or video call.

Fun fact: TCP has some implicit design considerations around the maximum cost of packet retransmission on a viable link that only works on roughly local planetary scale.
When NASA started to get out to Mars with the space Internet, they needed to tweak tcp to fit retransmission being proportionally much more expensive and let connections live longer before being "broken".

[–] Cenotaph@mander.xyz 3 points 6 days ago

True, but with the speed of light being constant as far as we know worrying about it is sort of a moot point

[–] 14th_cylon@lemm.ee 16 points 6 days ago

On the ground, we are also talking about fast internet, not about internet with "really wide bandwidth"

[–] Dindonmasker@sh.itjust.works 10 points 6 days ago (2 children)

Laser clearly has better bandwidth then radio in most cases right?

[–] TimeSquirrel@kbin.melroy.org 5 points 6 days ago

Higher frequencies = smaller wavelengths = ability to pack more information into the same wave.

That's why phones started using the very high upper microwave bands for 5G.

[–] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 5 points 6 days ago

It is how "fast" they can transfer x amount of information. Not how fast the material being used to encode information can move through space.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip -2 points 5 days ago

That's like saying that a Camaro isn't any faster than a PT Cruiser because the law says 65mph.