|
|
|
|
|
|
by sliverstorm
4936 days ago
|
|
|
Not sure if TCP/IP has been done, but packet radio [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Packet_radio] is a thing. That said, you don't need digital transmission for a video signal [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slow-scan_television] or for remotely controlling things. A more sophisticated network like that provided by TCP/IP is always a nice thing to have, but you pay the price in terms of lost range when you start trying to use WiFi for everything. My little handheld radio can reach up to 5 miles; my WiFi station might go 500 feet. Which link would you rather have in a disaster? It's true, robots can enhance the capabilities of rescue operations, but the comment I replied to was specifically talking about using drones to establish lines of communication. My point is that we already have that, and it doesn't require a hundred drones in the air. You might also be interested in APRS [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_Packet_Reporting_Syst...] |
|
|
- I never said you have to use wifi. You're right that radio would have a much greater range. - The main advantage I can think of for a system like this would be speed of deployment. In an area with poor line of sight, they could be used to bridge the gap until a proper base-station can be positioned. - They're more versatile. For example, they could be used as a mobile PA system. - Of course, it's all hypothetical. Nevertheless, it'd be fun to implement and more useful than the Pirate Bay's idea of a flying datacenter.