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

Irdest: Decentralised ad-hoc wireless mesh communication

irde.st

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 21 posts

Re: Irdest: Decentralised ad-hoc wireless mesh communication

#3

Post by myself248 »

I feel like every such project should be asked to justify its existence by explaining why it's not actually identical to some other similar project. Reviewing the existing literature might save a lot of repeated work.

Even if the answer is "the community that runs this one is friendlier", hey, that's a valid differentiation, okay. But seriously, there are ten bazillion wireless meshes now, what makes this one worthy of anyone's attention or effort?

Re: Irdest: Decentralised ad-hoc wireless mesh communication

#4

Post by vorpalhex »

I have an idea for a bunch of low powered nodes that make an sms analog, a bbs and an ebook library available during natural disasters. It'd be nifty to allow communities to communicate during extended disasters, where 4g towers can often lose their backup power.

I would love it if one of these mesh wifi projects really made it somewhere. That would be very convenient for this project.

Re: Irdest: Decentralised ad-hoc wireless mesh communication

#5

Post by montroser »

myself248 wrote: post #3

I feel like every such project should be asked to justify its existence by explaining why it's not actually identical to some other similar project. Reviewing the existing literature might save a lot of repeated work. Even if the answer is "the community that runs this one is friendlier", hey, that's a valid differentiation, okay. But seriously, there are ten bazillion wireless meshes now, what makes this one worthy…

Justify to whom? If you put in the research and work to build a thing, you get to have it exist.

Even if there are already similar projects, each next one may end up with a novel variation that could contribute to the broader understanding. Or even if not, even if it's just like all the others, it still has value for those learning from being involved.

Re: Irdest: Decentralised ad-hoc wireless mesh communication

#7

Post by zamadatix »

montroser wrote: post #5
myself248 wrote: post #3

I feel like every such project should be asked to justify its existence by explaining why it's not actually identical to some other similar project. Reviewing the existing literature might save a lot of repeated work. Even if the answer is "the community that runs this one is friendlier", hey, that's a valid differentiation, okay. But seriously, there are ten bazillion wireless meshes now, what makes this one worthy…

Justify to whom? If you put in the research and work to build a thing, you get to have it exist. Even if there are already similar projects, each next one may end up with a novel variation that could contribute to the broader understanding. Or even if not, even if it's just like all the others, it still has value for those learning from being involved.

To the people these pages are for, doesn't seem like they were built and spread for the author's own reading. Not that "I wanted to build my own to learn" isn't justification as well or wouldn't let people know what's special about it one just can't find such information in the pages.

Re: Irdest: Decentralised ad-hoc wireless mesh communication

#8

Post by radec »

chrispeel wrote: post #2

Althea started out with a similar pitch. I'm not sure where they are now https://althea.net/how-it-works

just an lurkers prospective, but they really seem to be growing fast. They have a lot of networks up and running and have been doing a pretty impressive job of getting people real broadband internet where there wasn't any before.

Re: Irdest: Decentralised ad-hoc wireless mesh communication

#10

Post by superkuh »

If the frequencies used are above the plasma frequency of the ionosphere (typically >30 MHz) like here then the only solution to "mesh" or cell networks is line of sight and that only comes from height above terrain. And height above terrain, except in rare and unique cases, is always expensive.

The only reason cell networks work is that the telcos pay big money for getting access, power, and backhaul to places up high. No amount of power increases, modulation gain, reflector aperture, software, or anything else you can think up is going to get around the lack of line of sight.

Unless a decentralized mesh network has enough money to do this it will only ever work in specific regions where single individuals or groups can pay $$$ and cover large areas. Like in Seattle where the mountainous coastal terrain is useful for hamwan's network, or in mega-cities like New York where residents have skyscraper roof access for p2p wireless community ISPs.

Post reply on HN