Duplicate discussion here:
Fraunhofer recently demonstrated 800 Mbps through visible light as well. http://www.fraunhofer.de/en/press/research-news/2010-2011/20...
This is not a new idea. Saw a functional demo more than eight years back. Checkout: http://www.talking-lights.com/
>And security would be a snap—if you can’t see the light, you can’t access the data.
That doesn't make any sense at all. People don't intercept data transmission with their eyes. If your computer or device can "see" the light, so can mine.
Does it means every light source is connected to a network cable ? If so, where is the security ? All it takes is to find a network cable and intercept the traffic. And there will be thousands of network cables in every building (at least as many as power cables). For me 'security' sounds like false advertising, in practice.
Kind of a cool idea - take IrDA to the next level. Probably no issue with FCC regulations since the visible spectrum is kind of a free-for-all.
Gives new meaning to a programmer "going dark."
Well, same meaning I guess. Only literal.
This blew my mind. It makes sense that light will be more controllable (think lamps projecting photos onto a wall), but the light itself being an internet source is trippy.
Could you just solder LED and phototransistor to a proper place in you wifi cards and achieve same goal?
Anyway to see this in action?
I like to work in the dark.
Saw this in the university research lab where it was developed about a year ago while touring new tech in Germany. Very cool to see that it's still moving forward.
I really hope they don't use this to autopilot cars. That seems completely reckless. If a terrorist happened to get an LED flashlight that disrupted the transmission of whatever light signals were going to the autopiloted cars, there would be chaos. It would be so easy interrupt these signals.
Thinking more about it, any signal "controlling" an autopiloted car would be insecure and be an easy exploit that any malicious-minded people could take advantage of. But that's a discussion that's besides the point.
How do you avoid interference between devices?
Is this meant for receiver-only, or bidirectional transfer? (he says bidirectional in the ted talk, but only talks about phones using their cameras to receive).
Seems a little like a technology in search of a problem.