5 ms·

I think it is actually Google looking to deploy Wi-Fi beaming balloons and Facebook is looking at solar powered drones. I vote for Google over drones...

freehunter 12y ago
>I vote for Google over drones Why is what? Are they any different? Are you balking at the word "drone"? How about "unmanned aircraft", which describes both Google and Facebook's approach? It's not like Facebook will be using the same "drones" the Air Force uses to bomb ground targets.
- 01Michael10 12y ago
  I know Facebook's drones are not the same as the military drones but... The idea of using "drones" leaves a bad taste in my mouth since they are currently used as immoral killing machines. I do agree with robszumski that drones may be a better bet then balloons. Hope Google provides the service as I prefer them as a company. Yes, both are data mining beasts but at least Google does some cool things and they have services I actually use. Not one Facebook service comes to mind that I use...
  - freehunter 12y ago
    That's what I was expecting you'd say, but I had really hoped I was wrong. Again, a drone is an unmanned aerial vehicle, so Google is using drones as well. In the comparison with military drones, you might as well say you don't want to see Google's balloons because the Hindenburg was such a disaster. Completely different beast. I would wager that there are more drones out there being used for entertainment than there are being used for killing... we call them quadricopters and you can buy them at Wal Mart.
    - 01Michael10 12y ago
      Your repeating yourself and I am being down-voted? No sh*t there are different types of drones. I simply meant they leave a bad taste in my mouth because how they are mostly being used now but did acknowledge drones may be a better bet then balloons. Oh, the Hindenburg is a bad analogy as it's purpose wasn't to target people from the sky to kill, it was an accident. Now, if Google is going to be using Hydrogen instead of Helium in their balloons like the Hindenburg then you would have a point.
      - freehunter 12y ago
        If Facebook was using missiles in their airplanes instead of wifi, you might have a point.
robszumski 12y ago
The correct way to look at this is to think of the drones as very low, maneuverable satellites, not airplanes. They're up in unregulated airspace above airliners and above most weather. The lower you are, the lower the latency. Think of a laser-based optical network that connects the drones, with laser links going down to earth as well. When you think of the control required to ensure a quality of service and full coverage, the balloons seems like a terrible solution.

freehunter 12y ago

>I vote for Google over drones Why is what? Are they any different? Are you balking at the word "drone"? How about "unmanned aircraft", which describes both Google and Facebook's approach? It's not like Facebook will be using the same "drones" the Air Force uses to bomb ground targets.

01Michael10 12y ago
I know Facebook's drones are not the same as the military drones but... The idea of using "drones" leaves a bad taste in my mouth since they are currently used as immoral killing machines. I do agree with robszumski that drones may be a better bet then balloons. Hope Google provides the service as I prefer them as a company. Yes, both are data mining beasts but at least Google does some cool things and they have services I actually use. Not one Facebook service comes to mind that I use...
- freehunter 12y ago
  That's what I was expecting you'd say, but I had really hoped I was wrong. Again, a drone is an unmanned aerial vehicle, so Google is using drones as well. In the comparison with military drones, you might as well say you don't want to see Google's balloons because the Hindenburg was such a disaster. Completely different beast. I would wager that there are more drones out there being used for entertainment than there are being used for killing... we call them quadricopters and you can buy them at Wal Mart.
  - 01Michael10 12y ago
    Your repeating yourself and I am being down-voted? No sh*t there are different types of drones. I simply meant they leave a bad taste in my mouth because how they are mostly being used now but did acknowledge drones may be a better bet then balloons. Oh, the Hindenburg is a bad analogy as it's purpose wasn't to target people from the sky to kill, it was an accident. Now, if Google is going to be using Hydrogen instead of Helium in their balloons like the Hindenburg then you would have a point.
    - freehunter 12y ago
      If Facebook was using missiles in their airplanes instead of wifi, you might have a point.

robszumski 12y ago

The correct way to look at this is to think of the drones as very low, maneuverable satellites, not airplanes. They're up in unregulated airspace above airliners and above most weather. The lower you are, the lower the latency. Think of a laser-based optical network that connects the drones, with laser links going down to earth as well. When you think of the control required to ensure a quality of service and full coverage, the balloons seems like a terrible solution.