Sure it is. But it requires a lot of power, and can only be aimed at a specific point. I think they do that for relaying tv around the world, to the networks, but it’s only used for point-to-point communication. Not a broadcast, like radio waves.The Conservative wrote:I know enough that laser communications is possible today.GrumpyCatFace wrote:Do you not understand what a laser is?The Conservative wrote:
Apparently not if you think data is narrow directional.
Net Neutrality
-
- Posts: 25287
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:50 am
- Location: Ohio
Re: Net Neutrality
-
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Re: Net Neutrality
Efficient programming will likely be automated within two decades. It already is in Java. Java is functional now. You tell it what you want to do and the compiler figures out how to do that optimally. It's still a bit clumsy, in my opinion, but that's where this is going.
Basically, writing code, rather than writing instructions on how to do something, will involve writing specifications for what you want the machine to do. The compiler and interpreters will optimize everything. From there it's a hop, skip, and a jump to specifying how to solve a general class of problems so that engineers need only describe the specifics of an instance of that general class of problems, and let code generation do the rest of the work.
In the future, the entire software engineering discipline will he divided between engineers who focus on problem domains and specifications on one side, and on the other side are engineers who focus on code generation, optimization, etc.
Ideally, one should only need to learn a specification language that allows them to describe the problem they need solved. A specification language could be general purpose, but more likely would be tailored to a single problem domain.
Basically, writing code, rather than writing instructions on how to do something, will involve writing specifications for what you want the machine to do. The compiler and interpreters will optimize everything. From there it's a hop, skip, and a jump to specifying how to solve a general class of problems so that engineers need only describe the specifics of an instance of that general class of problems, and let code generation do the rest of the work.
In the future, the entire software engineering discipline will he divided between engineers who focus on problem domains and specifications on one side, and on the other side are engineers who focus on code generation, optimization, etc.
Ideally, one should only need to learn a specification language that allows them to describe the problem they need solved. A specification language could be general purpose, but more likely would be tailored to a single problem domain.
-
- Posts: 14797
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:43 am
Re: Net Neutrality
That's the thing people are missing, it is a reason why lasers are Line of Sight for data transfers. If you produced a system in where the laser hits one point and that point acts like a distribution center, the data/power requirements could be lessened. Standard wifi can produce speeds of 1.5Gbps, and I have a system that can produce a signal for 1/4 a mile...GrumpyCatFace wrote:Sure it is. But it requires a lot of power, and can only be aimed at a specific point. I think they do that for relaying tv around the world, to the networks, but it’s only used for point-to-point communication. Not a broadcast, like radio waves.The Conservative wrote:I know enough that laser communications is possible today.GrumpyCatFace wrote:
Do you not understand what a laser is?
If I can do this with technology I can buy over the counter, don't you think ISPs and other agencies have been lax for quite some time?
#NotOneRedCent
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Net Neutrality
I use mobile broadband the majority of the time. It has improved vastly over the last 2 years. Where as once it was measured in Kbs and ruled out anything other than playing poker and very slow browsing I now have much better download speeds. I just took 2 different speed tests which indicated speeds of 26 Mbs and 24 Mbs. I can watch most vids at a reasonable resolution now whereas before they were impossible at any quality.
It does come and go though, it often lets me down in the mornings but is generally reliable for the rest of the day.
When I first started on DCF it would take upto 5 mins to download a single page of memes.
It does come and go though, it often lets me down in the mornings but is generally reliable for the rest of the day.
When I first started on DCF it would take upto 5 mins to download a single page of memes.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Re: Net Neutrality
Montegriffo wrote:I use mobile broadband the majority of the time. It has improved vastly over the last 2 years. Where as once it was measured in Kbs and ruled out anything other than playing poker and very slow browsing I now have much better download speeds. I just took 2 different speed tests which indicated speeds of 26 Mbs and 24 Mbs. I can watch most vids at a reasonable resolution now whereas before they were impossible at any quality.
It does come and go though, it often lets me down in the mornings but is generally reliable for the rest of the day.
When I first started on DCF it would take upto 5 mins to download a single page of memes.
Turbocode algorithm is magical. The Frenchmen who discovered it deserved Nobel prizes.
Motorola actually tried to do what you described: create a wireless network for just data traffic. The same corporations trying to scam Americans out of net neutrality essentially criminalized it in most parts of America because they would have to compete. It's easier for monopolies to bribe state legislators into criminalizing competition than to compete.
-
- Posts: 18718
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:14 am
Re: Net Neutrality
As I understand it there are only 3 companies providing the mobile networks in the UK but there are dozens of service providers using those networks. Seems to me that without regulations there would only be 3 providers and far less competition keeping prices down and raising monthly download limits.
For legal reasons, we are not threatening to destroy U.S. government property with our glorious medieval siege engine. But if we wanted to, we could. But we won’t. But we could.
-
- Posts: 25287
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:50 am
- Location: Ohio
Re: Net Neutrality
That’s how cell phones work. Now ask yourself why there are 2 networks, and 2 standards.The Conservative wrote:That's the thing people are missing, it is a reason why lasers are Line of Sight for data transfers. If you produced a system in where the laser hits one point and that point acts like a distribution center, the data/power requirements could be lessened. Standard wifi can produce speeds of 1.5Gbps, and I have a system that can produce a signal for 1/4 a mile...GrumpyCatFace wrote:Sure it is. But it requires a lot of power, and can only be aimed at a specific point. I think they do that for relaying tv around the world, to the networks, but it’s only used for point-to-point communication. Not a broadcast, like radio waves.The Conservative wrote:
I know enough that laser communications is possible today.
If I can do this with technology I can buy over the counter, don't you think ISPs and other agencies have been lax for quite some time?
-
- Posts: 14797
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:43 am
Re: Net Neutrality
Because they keep eating each other up.GrumpyCatFace wrote:That’s how cell phones work. Now ask yourself why there are 2 networks, and 2 standards.The Conservative wrote:That's the thing people are missing, it is a reason why lasers are Line of Sight for data transfers. If you produced a system in where the laser hits one point and that point acts like a distribution center, the data/power requirements could be lessened. Standard wifi can produce speeds of 1.5Gbps, and I have a system that can produce a signal for 1/4 a mile...GrumpyCatFace wrote:
Sure it is. But it requires a lot of power, and can only be aimed at a specific point. I think they do that for relaying tv around the world, to the networks, but it’s only used for point-to-point communication. Not a broadcast, like radio waves.
If I can do this with technology I can buy over the counter, don't you think ISPs and other agencies have been lax for quite some time?
#NotOneRedCent
-
- Posts: 25287
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:50 am
- Location: Ohio
Re: Net Neutrality
Yet pricing is nearly identical, and data speeds are the same.The Conservative wrote:Because they keep eating each other up.GrumpyCatFace wrote:That’s how cell phones work. Now ask yourself why there are 2 networks, and 2 standards.The Conservative wrote:
That's the thing people are missing, it is a reason why lasers are Line of Sight for data transfers. If you produced a system in where the laser hits one point and that point acts like a distribution center, the data/power requirements could be lessened. Standard wifi can produce speeds of 1.5Gbps, and I have a system that can produce a signal for 1/4 a mile...
If I can do this with technology I can buy over the counter, don't you think ISPs and other agencies have been lax for quite some time?
-
- Posts: 14797
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:43 am
Re: Net Neutrality
Not really, there are multiple groups out there, but it all depends how you want to play the game.GrumpyCatFace wrote:Yet pricing is nearly identical, and data speeds are the same.The Conservative wrote:Because they keep eating each other up.GrumpyCatFace wrote:
That’s how cell phones work. Now ask yourself why there are 2 networks, and 2 standards.
#NotOneRedCent