logoalt Hacker News

737373737306/16/20252 repliesview on HN

I don't understand this fascination with networks that require special hardware to intermediate between end user nodes. Would be much nicer if things just ran, zero-click, via WiFi, on most common computers, netbooks and phones, pure p2p with automatic forwarding, no?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_ad_hoc_network

By requiring special hardware, and be it just some common router, or any sort of special technical skill, you are already excluding 99.99% of the world population...


Replies

steve_adams_8606/16/2025

This isn't about convenience and accessibility so much as resiliency in emergencies.

You can run LoRa from a small power bank for days, or run it off of a small battery and solar panel indefinitely. Wifi is much more power hungry. Wifi also doesn't offer kilometres of range, making that power cost largely wasteful.

In an emergency, if you have limited power, WiFi will exclude 100% of the population simply because it's not practical to operate at all. LoRa, even if it enables 0.01% of the population (primarily experts in the technology) in that emergency, is a greater benefit to everyone at that time.

WiFi is a peace time technology based around a rich infrastructure that is not resilient in emergencies. If you skimmed the article you should check it out again. She details this stuff, and it's actually really interesting and worth understanding if you're into this stuff:

    LoRa radios have several advantages for use in emergency communications:
    
    no centralized infrastructure needed
    no license needed
    cheap (starting at ~€20)
    low-power (< 1W, can power with an ordinary mobile phone powerbank)
    runs open source Meshtastic firmware
    can send text messages across several line-of-sight hops (several kms)
    can connect via Bluetooth or WiFi to phones/computers
    many urban areas have a good Meshtastic network already
show 1 reply