4 ms·

Not Wi-Fi, but mobile phone/data. From the article: “[T]he change of course is produced by indications of the captain of the boat, who gave instructions to ap

Not Wi-Fi, but mobile phone/data. From the article: “[T]he change of course is produced by indications of the captain of the boat, who gave instructions to approach about 5 miles away from the coast of Mauritius, looking for a telephone and internet signal, so that the crew members could communicate with their families,” the AMP said.

colejohnson66 6y ago
The WiFi claim kept getting repeated even when it made no sense. WiFi doesn’t have the signal strength for miles of distance. Not to mention that if the ship were close enough to shore such that WiFi could reach, it wouldn’t be so much of a shore, but a very deep cliff.
- s_dev 6y ago
  What about Cellular data from LTE towers etc? They can reach miles and unlikely there is any out at sea. Probably all using their phones as hotspots rather than trying to connect to a Free Starbucks Router.
  - colejohnson66 6y ago
    Yes. Those can reach. My comment was saying that the claim it was for WiFi didn’t make sense, although, I figured at the time they meant cellular data.
- withinboredom 6y ago
  It does. I had one when I lived on a sailboat. I’ve been able to get consumer grade routers to broadcast 3km with line of sight, ddwrt, and no physical modifications. Somewhere like an ocean (or a desert) you won’t have much, if any, interference.
  - callalex 6y ago
    How many bits per year was your throughput?
    - withinboredom 6y ago
      In the case of the router, it was going through a 1mbps satellite uplink, so it didn’t need to be fast (though it was still fast, at -50db IIRC, it’s the SNR that matters). In the case of the directional antenna on a boat, I got regular speeds just tons of dropped packets. I have no idea how far I was from the routers, but I couldn’t see the houses.
dredmorbius 6y ago
All but certainly someone nontechnical referred to mobile data as "wifi", and press ran with quote-accuracy over factual-accuracy. "Wifi" is becoming generic for wireless data access, much as kleenex, xerox, dixie cups, champagne, asprin, dremel, jet ski, google, ping pong, rollerblade, onseie, etc., etc.

colejohnson66 6y ago

The WiFi claim kept getting repeated even when it made no sense. WiFi doesn’t have the signal strength for miles of distance. Not to mention that if the ship were close enough to shore such that WiFi could reach, it wouldn’t be so much of a shore, but a very deep cliff.

s_dev 6y ago
What about Cellular data from LTE towers etc? They can reach miles and unlikely there is any out at sea. Probably all using their phones as hotspots rather than trying to connect to a Free Starbucks Router.
- colejohnson66 6y ago
  Yes. Those can reach. My comment was saying that the claim it was for WiFi didn’t make sense, although, I figured at the time they meant cellular data.
withinboredom 6y ago
It does. I had one when I lived on a sailboat. I’ve been able to get consumer grade routers to broadcast 3km with line of sight, ddwrt, and no physical modifications. Somewhere like an ocean (or a desert) you won’t have much, if any, interference.
- callalex 6y ago
  How many bits per year was your throughput?
  - withinboredom 6y ago
    In the case of the router, it was going through a 1mbps satellite uplink, so it didn’t need to be fast (though it was still fast, at -50db IIRC, it’s the SNR that matters). In the case of the directional antenna on a boat, I got regular speeds just tons of dropped packets. I have no idea how far I was from the routers, but I couldn’t see the houses.

dredmorbius 6y ago

All but certainly someone nontechnical referred to mobile data as "wifi", and press ran with quote-accuracy over factual-accuracy. "Wifi" is becoming generic for wireless data access, much as kleenex, xerox, dixie cups, champagne, asprin, dremel, jet ski, google, ping pong, rollerblade, onseie, etc., etc.