143
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 May 2025
143 points (98.0% liked)
Technology
38931 readers
226 users here now
A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.
Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
They claim they’ve overcome that hurdle though, as per the article.
Yes, but the article is literally nothing without that information.
The only interesting thing about a new approach to laser internet is if they've solved the critical issue holding it back.
I wonder what they did, though. Because the article is omitting most of the interesting details and frames it as if this as if optical communication in itself was something new or disruptive... I mean if I read the Wikipedia article on Long-range optical wireless communication, it seems a bunch of companies have already invested 3 digit million sums into solving this exact issue...
Well, most likely they'll never say what they did to solve it, assuming it is solved. That's how capitalism works. Everyone tries to keep innovation secret, so we have to invent the same thing dozens of times.
Nah, all it takes is one person buying it, disassemble it and look at the mechanics to see whether there are things like motors and mirrors inside the transmitter to do new things like align it dynamically. And I mean the other things, physics, the atmosphere, lenses and near infraread lasers along with signal processing are well-understood. I think it won't be a big secret once it turns into a real thing... I mean as long as it's hype only it might be.
Maybe, though processes and algorithms won't be copied easily legally. If they did some special coating to lenses or something, or if they have a really smart algorithm to correct for different effects, those are protected by law. You can examine it and try to replicate it, but you can't copy it.
Sure. I think we're talking a bit about different things here. I didn't want to copy it, just know how it's done 😆 But yeah, you're right. And what you said has another benefit. If they want to protect it by law, we have a process for that: Patents. And those require to publish how it's done...
Okay, photo taken (by Gabriele Barni) from 17.1177 km (claimed metric kilometers) straight distance to the buildings:
.
You can imagine how wobbly the image was.
How to compensate it? Wide, powerful beam? Gonna be blinded by an invisible light?
Quote from the video:
As opposed to imperial, customary or nautical kilometres?
Yes