I think Li-Fi is more comparable to Ethernet instead of Wi-Fi, not because the fundamentals are very different but because of the link budgets available. If you

I think Li-Fi is more comparable to Ethernet instead of Wi-Fi, not because the fundamentals are very different but because of the link budgets available. If you think of an ethernet line as a pipe carrying data, then a collimated laser can be thought of in a similar way - most of the energy that you transmit is going to make it to the destination, and that is not the case with Wi-Fi, even with very high gain antennas. This allows for different modulation schemes and thus higher throughput. Copper ethernet is now capable of 1.6 Tbps [1] and Li-Fi doesn't seem so very fast compared to that; however keep in mind this is comparing only physical layers. Demonstrations of optical laser links of hundreds of Gbps over hundreds of kilometers have taken place [2] using COTS optical ethernet transceivers and special output stages providing precise collimation and pointing. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_physical_layer#1.6_Tbit/s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethernet_physical_layer#1.6_Tb... [2] https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20210026855/downloads/spie2022-tbird-v1.pdf https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/20210026855/downloads/sp... For your second question, I'm not sure how baby monitors work but the proposed wavelengths are unlicenced and there are little if any rules for how to deal with interference. There are rules for eye safety of laser which limits the maximum energy that can be delivered to the output. Generally as Li-Fi gets more common we will have to learn to deal with interference as it arrives. For example, Lidar systems (older, noncoherent ones) interfere with one another and are even susceptible to interferece from IR motion detectors and such, but these aspects have to be considered during design.