Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Beartooth

beartooth.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 152 posts

Re: Beartooth

#61

Post by tjohns »

seanp2k2 wrote: post #35
freehunter wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been trying to solve an issue similar to what Beartooth is doing, and 2 miles is amazing range. Bear in mind, these aren't huge towers hundreds of feet above the ground with 50kWh power sources and million dollar price tags, they're battery-powered, handheld, and consumer-priced. And cell towers with all the advantages listed only travel less than 20 miles. 2 miles with those limitations is a great distance. I t…

Ham can do text and digital voice over e.g. D-STAR. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amateur_radio_modes Encryption to obscure your communication is technically against the rules, but things like D-STAR need a proprietary decoder (the spec isn't open) to be decoded, so some people consider that encryption even though it's pretty popular and not being shut down: http://www.amateurradio.com/encryption-is-already…

D-STAR is actually an open standard.

The only part that's closed is the voice codec (AMBE). But if you just want to transmit or decode data packets, you can definitely build your own hardware. There's even a couple SDR modules for it:

http://www.flexradio.com/amateur-products/flex-6000-signatur...

http://www.rtl-sdr.com/listening-d-star-digital-voice-dsd-1-...

Re: Beartooth

#62

Post by whorleater »

tekklloneer wrote: post #5

The problem with any mesh network is adoption, and unless this uses some sort of high range communications, I don't see how it'd work well on the given example of "ski slope". I wish they had more specs, less videos. edit: ah, never mind (thanks linksbro)

This product is more of a walkie talkie implementation on your phone than a widespread mesh network.

Re: Beartooth

#63

Post by munificent »

donpdonp wrote: post #50
linksbro wrote: post #4

It transmits via some sub-1ghz free spectrum bands, which travel a good distance and have decent structure penetration. https://beartooth.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/216797018-Wh... This is why unlicensed spectrum bands are great; they allow for stuff like this to be built without a billion dollar spectrum price tag.

I assume they mean the 900mhz band in the US. How is a cell phone supposed to communicate with the Beartooth? If its not a cell tower, the phone only knows bluetooth and wifi on 2.4/5Ghz.

> How is a cell phone supposed to communicate with the Beartooth?

Given the name, I would presume Bluetooth.

Re: Beartooth

#64

Post by LeoPanthera »

throwaway21816 wrote: post #21

Or you could buy a $20 baofeng and just yell "WHERE YOU AT?" via FRS

Using a Baofeng radio on the FRS band is illegal. Transmission on the FRS band is limited to 500 milliwatts using FCC-approved devices only. Baofeng radios are not approved and can transmit at up to 5 watts.

However, if you get an Amateur Radio license, you can transmit in the 2 meter and 70cm bands at full power, legally, using your Baofeng radio.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2-meter_band

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/70-centimeter_band

http://www.arrl.org/getting-licensed

Re: Beartooth

#65

Post by michael212 »

seanp2k2 wrote: post #60
chrissnell wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're talking about 2-meter radios, you're going to need a ham radio license to use them in the US. It's not hard, but it is necessary. Also, FCC regulations do not permit "broadcasting" on these bands. That is, you can't play music over them. Having a music festival playing in the background is flirting with that rule. You're better off just using FRS radios.

The "23 mile range" business is very optimistic. You'll probably never see over 5 miles of range unless it's line-of-sight between two mountains. However, they'd be great at most festivals or e.g. Burning Man. Look for something FRS or GMRS. There are also 2-meter (~144mhz) radios which parent is talking about like e.g. a Baaofeng UV-5R which are inexpensive software-defined radios that can operate on licensed and un…

hi sean, we say about 2 miles in all of our documentation. we agree 23 miles isn't realistic. i have personally seen 2 miles plus results hiking, skiing, etc. hope that helps

Re: Beartooth

#66

Post by dazmax »

baldfat wrote: post #16
kin wrote: post #8

Would love to see this in action as it solves my music festival communication woes. The price tag is a little steep though for adoption.

Try buying a bunch of two ways on amazon. You can get 6 of them for $150 and they work for 10 hours on 2 AA batteries and have a 23 mile range.

Except people prefer to text these days.

Re: Beartooth

#67

Post by habitue »

jdietrich wrote: post #30

As with any smartphone product being marketed for use in wilderness environments, a note of caution is necessary. Rescue services have seen an increasing number of life-threatening situations caused by the unwise use of smartphones. Phones aren't sufficiently rugged and often lack user-replaceable batteries, so cannot be relied upon as a navigation tool or as a means of emergency communication. If you're considering…

It looks like this product is less aimed at being relied on when you're in a survival situation, and more about extending the benefits of your cell phone when you're out of range. For example, in Yosemite Valley, there is no cell service, but there are mobs of people everywhere. This tool would be nice to get some auxiliary benefits of cell phones when hiking with your family.

Re: Beartooth

#68

Post by nly »

linksbro wrote: post #4

It transmits via some sub-1ghz free spectrum bands, which travel a good distance and have decent structure penetration. https://beartooth.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/216797018-Wh... This is why unlicensed spectrum bands are great; they allow for stuff like this to be built without a billion dollar spectrum price tag.

How does thing scale with user density? That's what I want to know. If everyone at a concert had one of these, would it still be useable? Unlicensed spectrum could already be crowded or noisy

Re: Beartooth

#69

Post by tjohns »

r00fus wrote: post #58
anthonybsd wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Orienteering was mandatory in my school when I was a teenager. Interesting memories... :)

Which school was this? I've never heard of such a requirement outside of say, Scouts or the military. Along with basic financials, I inclined to agree that'd be a very good add for required classes.

It was mandatory at my school, as well. We covered basic orienteering, outdoor winter survival, emergency signalling, and avalanche safety.

If I remember right, it was a one- or two-day field trip we took during middle school. Everyone was excited when it was their class's turn to go. (But who doesn't get excited for a field trip?)

Not as comprehensive as what you'd learn in scouts or taking a professional survival class, but it was a good overview. I still remember a lot of it and find the material useful.

This was in South Lake Tahoe CA, so we were already in the mountains. :) Cost wouldn't have been any worse than any other field trip.

Post reply on HN