FCC to authorize more powerful wireless devices in 6 GHz Wi-Fi band
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
Upvote
45
(48
/
-3)
Are VR/AR head sets really suffering with today's Wi-Fi6/7? How much bandwidth do they really need?
Upvote
70
(71
/
-1)
All hail Il Duce! Show your gratitude, plebs! He parted the waves with his own bare hands to bring us this gift out of thin air!
/s
Upvote
82
(83
/
-1)
I'm cautiously happy about this. There is zero benevolence in this administration, so a win for the consumer has me suspicious of what it's going to cost us.
Upvote
63
(67
/
-4)
What we need for better WiFi in apartment blocks is more power.
That helps if I need to connect to a wireless router from a few blocks away to steal bandwidth. Oh, and it makes my phone battery drain faster too.
Upvote
35
(37
/
-2)
A real effect (at least for me) of all of the BS that the current president's administration is spreading everywhere:
Anything FCC Chairman Brendan Carr says, to be honest, I am suspicious of.
I know that is not wise of me...but it is how I feel right now.
I fear for my country and its present, as well as its future.
Anything FCC Chairman Brendan Carr says, to be honest, I am suspicious of.
I know that is not wise of me...but it is how I feel right now.
I fear for my country and its present, as well as its future.
Upvote
75
(76
/
-1)
Setting aside the policy angle - the idea that Trump is drilling down on spectrum allocations and radio device power limits and demanded this change is so funny to me. The only way he directly ordered this is if a consumer group or cable company made a huge $TRUMPcoin buy with the exact policy requirements in the purchase notes.
Makes me wonder if they’ve set up some kind of ZenDesk or Jira ticket system for $TRUMPcoin purchases, to automatically route the bribe information to the relevant authority for execution on the corruption.
Do they have bribery project managers? Would be useful! Thats a lot of detailed policy bribery to handle through a central system with no tracking!
Makes me wonder if they’ve set up some kind of ZenDesk or Jira ticket system for $TRUMPcoin purchases, to automatically route the bribe information to the relevant authority for execution on the corruption.
Do they have bribery project managers? Would be useful! Thats a lot of detailed policy bribery to handle through a central system with no tracking!
Upvote
90
(91
/
-1)
Why is the Wi-Fi hardware industry advocating for higher power? That would make the performance of existing devices go down due to higher interference, and also require fewer devices for equivalent coverage, meaning fewer devices to sell and lower profits. Why would they view this as an advantage?
Upvote
68
(68
/
0)
I think this is just for outdoor devices which will still be limited to lower power than indoor devices. I wouldn't expect this to have a huge effect on congestion since your average urban apartment dweller probably isn't installing outdoors APs. Conversely if you have a large property, higher power means larger coverage.
Upvote
21
(22
/
-1)
Because not all of us are somewhere where interference exists. Range in my house with century old plaster walls on the other hand is less than 5 meters in those higher frequencies. And around 10 in the lower ones. Limiting power based on number of other foreign networks seen does seem like a useful feature in future specs though.
Upvote
30
(30
/
0)
It's on my to-do list to buy a new router because the one Verizon gave me with my FiOS subscription has TOO strong a signal and doesn't seem to have a way to turn it down in the settings—it reaches out too far into the hall even with the door closed and then my cell phone won't let go of the signal even when it's not really working. Turning off everything but the 6 GHz antenna fixed that but then I had to turn the 5 GHz antenna back on to let the Nest connect to wifi (the Nest came with the apartment so out of my control to update to one that can use 6 GHz).
Upvote
9
(10
/
-1)
Considering monitors literally use 40+ gbps of bandwidth over hdmi 2.1/DisplayPort equivalent to support 4k/120hz and etc...
Yes, wifi 7 and it's max theoretical bandwidth of 46 gbps (with all 3 bands and minimal interference) is a limiting factor whe the higher end VR/AR does like 3k per eye at 90-120 hz....
Upvote
33
(35
/
-2)
But but ... it is wise to be suspicious of anyone in Trump's realm.
That's doesn't mean toss everything they say out of hand; just consider that occasionally they do something that is neither cruel nor a method to funnel money and power to the despot-in-chief.
Don't worry, tomorrow they'll be back to their standard playbook.
Upvote
32
(32
/
0)
Cranking up the power of access points does nothing to improve their ability to receive a signal and adds reflections. Cranking up power in buildings with metal or rock/plaster walls creates a ton of locations (pockets) where there is a strong signal but poor or even non-existing throughput where beacon signals from APs have bounced in but devices are unable to reach the AP back out to be heard. And even if cranking power were, somehow, a solution, it still doesn't answer my question about this is beneficial to the manufacturers. No one cares about the end users.
Upvote
27
(30
/
-3)
https://www.wireshark.org/
Of course the communications industry wants to keep changing to new things. It's because there's a partmership with them and the Government. Brendan Carr is a symptom of the problem just like the Reese's guy that killed net neutrality.
Of course the communications industry wants to keep changing to new things. It's because there's a partmership with them and the Government. Brendan Carr is a symptom of the problem just like the Reese's guy that killed net neutrality.
Upvote
0
(4
/
-4)
Upvote
24
(24
/
0)
Is 6GHz really good for anything other than point to point or close proximity?
I keep hoping that LoRa will make it into commercial offerings -- imagine being able to text someone without the need to connect to a cell provider at all!
I keep hoping that LoRa will make it into commercial offerings -- imagine being able to text someone without the need to connect to a cell provider at all!
Upvote
3
(5
/
-2)
For their basic functions on a stand alone device - to translate the view to someone who is watching on a monitor or something, WiFi6 is more than enough.
For wireless access where there is wireless instead of a Displayport/HDMI they have dedicated dongles at the 60GHz range, so its a line-of-sight technology. Generally using 58.32GHz-69.12GHz (center channel)
See above
Upvote
6
(6
/
0)
This is what I was hoping the article would address— what will this mean for WiFi network congestion? The 2.4 and 5Ghz ranges are already cluttered AF, and a “loudness war” of higher power devices sounds prefect for making the 6Ghz spectrum just as bad.
Can someone who knows about this please chime in?
Upvote
11
(11
/
0)
Don't forget, 5G gave you COVID. Hopefully they've fixed that part in the 6G rollout.
Upvote
13
(13
/
0)
XSportSeeker
Ars Scholae Palatinae
I wonder how the EHS people who elected Trump and his troop of clowns are feeling right now... major headache and a buzzing sensation in the back of their heads which ultimately is the fault for every single character and health issue they have?
For those wondering how the heck Trump's doormat Carr and administration could get it right on this one, the answer is pretty simple, it's right there in the article, one of the titles in fact -
As for how this could go wrong, for one, the more power you put into Wi-fi signal the longer the reach and stronger the signal. This makes it easier to tap on it, or use it for whatever - for instance, by a police force increasingly using dirty tactics for mass surveillance. Data brokers and harvesters could also profit from this, as well as criminals.
Since it's explicitly talking about outdoors devices to improve range and functionality for automation and a bunch of stuff, this means putting needs of a certain category of businesses, applications, and whatnot over needs of everyone else. They can use Wi-fi with more power, you can't.
Because when you have more powerful Wi-fi devices outdoors, the signal of those devices will start interfering more with your stuff, and you have no say over it.
By consequence, it ends up pushing people to buy new devices that can generate the most powerful signal so it doesn't get swamped by others.
And since Wi-fi signal also can interfere with other wireless communication standards, such as Bluetooth, this justify further revisions, and you having to buy new models to replace old ones that cannot function well in the new landscape of powerful Wi-fi devices interfering with your stuff.
All of those are unrelated to politics and regulations btw... it's just a bunch of possibilities that could happen in a landscape like that. There are reasons why Wi-fi power was capped. It wasn't about health effects, but more like leveling down the usage of tech to attend everyones' needs instead of only a few. Democratic usage, a concept that US politics does not understand anymore.
For those wondering how the heck Trump's doormat Carr and administration could get it right on this one, the answer is pretty simple, it's right there in the article, one of the titles in fact -
Wi-Fi advocates “pushed hard”
What this means is that corporations interested in pushing this decision paid the administration to take their side - how everything gets done in a mercenary fascist criminal administration.As for how this could go wrong, for one, the more power you put into Wi-fi signal the longer the reach and stronger the signal. This makes it easier to tap on it, or use it for whatever - for instance, by a police force increasingly using dirty tactics for mass surveillance. Data brokers and harvesters could also profit from this, as well as criminals.
Since it's explicitly talking about outdoors devices to improve range and functionality for automation and a bunch of stuff, this means putting needs of a certain category of businesses, applications, and whatnot over needs of everyone else. They can use Wi-fi with more power, you can't.
Because when you have more powerful Wi-fi devices outdoors, the signal of those devices will start interfering more with your stuff, and you have no say over it.
By consequence, it ends up pushing people to buy new devices that can generate the most powerful signal so it doesn't get swamped by others.
And since Wi-fi signal also can interfere with other wireless communication standards, such as Bluetooth, this justify further revisions, and you having to buy new models to replace old ones that cannot function well in the new landscape of powerful Wi-fi devices interfering with your stuff.
All of those are unrelated to politics and regulations btw... it's just a bunch of possibilities that could happen in a landscape like that. There are reasons why Wi-fi power was capped. It wasn't about health effects, but more like leveling down the usage of tech to attend everyones' needs instead of only a few. Democratic usage, a concept that US politics does not understand anymore.
Upvote
11
(13
/
-2)
They don't have to wait until they're out of power. Remember "Who negotiated this idiotic trade agreement with Canada?!? We're gonna tariff them until they negotiate a new deal with us! That last deal was made by a moron!"
The war on self-awareness was over before it started.
Upvote
24
(25
/
-1)
Sorry to tell you, there's no version of Nest (or AFAIK, any thermostat / smarthome stuff at all) that uses 6GHz. A lot of it doesn't even do 5GHz, 2.4-only isn't totally unheard of.
Upvote
10
(10
/
0)
Well more like funny silver lining than bad news since I can't replace the thermostat anyhow.
Upvote
3
(3
/
0)
6 GHz is mostly the same as 5 GHz but with more channels. It basically shares the same penetration and diffraction properties as 5 GHz. The main problem with 5 GHz is that the dynamic frequency selection rules are so onerous they reduce the number of available channels to basically 2, 6 GHz offers many more channels. That means youve got a much better chance of finding free space in a crowded environment.
Upvote
8
(8
/
0)
I'm sure it's got absolutely nothing to do with this:
https://meincmagazine.com/information...ess-signals-to-identify-people-through-walls/
https://meincmagazine.com/information...ess-signals-to-identify-people-through-walls/
Upvote
5
(5
/
0)
What I am wondering is how many manufacturers end up actually caring. The issue, I haven't heard the rest of the raising their power limits and manufacturers don't like to manufacture items that can only be sold in the US.
Upvote
2
(2
/
0)
If the Verizon router lets you do a guest network, just do that for the nest then do only 6 ghz for your main network.
Upvote
4
(4
/
0)
Covid are for weak people, not the steak-eating, beer-chugging, gun-shooting patriots.
Real patriots dont use WiFi ... they use WiFreedom!
Upvote
7
(8
/
-1)
Yeah, nah, not buying it. More power is, most often, not the answer in the WiFi usage scenarios. Sure, there's a niche or two that would directly benefit, but a large-scale roll-out of higher power is likely to result in worse WiFi, not better. Especially once yahoos start fiddling with the new gear and fooling it into operating outside its range - more noise for everyone else around.
Upvote
7
(7
/
0)