8 comments

  • kawfey1 hour ago
    &quot;Ideal&quot; isn&#x27;t doing as much heavy lifting as I thought it would be in this article. This is a basic wardriving setup on flat ground.<p>Standard wifi is phy limited to ~1600m unless you can increase ack response time limit, otherwise retransmissions will be sent by the sender while ack&#x27;s are being transmitted by the receiver.<p>Then, per friis equation, with enough power and antenna gain (it&#x27;s the antenna gain that really matters) the limit is only obstructions&#x2F;terrain. Get yourself high enough (mountains, planes, satellites, moons, etc), or bounce of an opportune reflector (planes, moon, aurora, meteors, ionosphere, rain, hail, etc), and there is no real limit, besides how big of an antenna you&#x27;re willing to build in orbit :P<p>or just make the throughput really really really REALLY slow and ice your receivers with liquid He.<p>Hams make a game of it: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.arrl.org&#x2F;files&#x2F;file&#x2F;WA50-Standings&#x2F;Distance-Records-13-June-2025-Final.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.arrl.org&#x2F;files&#x2F;file&#x2F;WA50-Standings&#x2F;Distance-Reco...</a>
    • BetterThanSober1 hour ago
      For discussion purposes just &quot;WiFi&quot; isn&#x27;t doing much. I doubt typical AP&lt;-&gt;phone 802.11ac on 5GHz can achieve &gt;1km let alone 802.11ax&#x2F;be on 6Ghz carrier, even 802.11n can only reach a few hundred meters with line-of-sight, sunny day, and no interference<p>Long range WiFi is a &quot;solved&quot; problem with 802.11ah with sub-Ghz carrier and can reach more than a km depending on bandwidth requirements<p>All that assuming tx power is within regulation, no enterprise grade antenna, and all with commercially available parts
  • CobaltFire3 hours ago
    They address that they were looking at the maximum unlicensed power.<p>In HAM circles some people do use WiFi in an arguably legal manner by making the SSID their callsign and either making the network open or putting the password somewhere public. This is because you are not allowed to use public bands for encrypted communications (with a carveout for satellite control, for obvious reasons).<p>I&#x27;m unsure what ranges can be hit with that setup, but I know it can be far enough that LoS due to curvature of the earth becomes a factor.<p>I do think just getting a wireless P2P bridge is easier and smarter and why this hasn&#x27;t seen more use.
    • DaSHacka5 minutes ago
      &gt; In HAM circles some people do use WiFi in an arguably legal manner by making the SSID their callsign and either making the network open or putting the password somewhere public.<p>And presumably also no SSL when browsing?<p>Part of why I never really understood the appeal to getting a ham license. Things like no encrypted communications really limits the utility.<p>Anything outside of talking to randoms on the open air, and you&#x27;ll better served by the computer networking infrastructure where encryption is allowed, you can speak to anyone in the world anyway, and the medium (IE physical device) you&#x27;re using is irrelevant.
    • firesteelrain2 hours ago
      You can buy consumer wireless repeaters basically but the latency sucks
  • bradleybuda2 hours ago
    Not one Pringles can utilized. We have failed to pass along the ancient knowledge.
    • walrus012 hours ago
      Not a Senao 802.11a pcmcia card in sight
  • somat2 hours ago
    I vaguely remember some sort of stunt where they had got hold of two 3 meter dishes paired them with off the shelf wifi radios, mounted one on a pickup truck and drove out across a dry lake bed. 53 miles before signal loss is what I remember.<p>I will probably never be able to find the source, and my poor memory probably inflated the range like any good fish story.
    • d0vs2 hours ago
      <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.techmonitor.ai&#x2F;technology&#x2F;wifi_and_bluetooth_distance_records_smashed&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.techmonitor.ai&#x2F;technology&#x2F;wifi_and_bluetooth_dis...</a>
    • fragmede1 hour ago
      Yeah, I met Radio when he was at MIT. He got a black badge from Defcon for it.
  • firesteelrain3 hours ago
    I am still reminded of early WiFi and ways to extend it with Cantenna or foil backed contraptions made out of cardboard.
    • CobaltFire3 hours ago
      Used a cantenna and a PCI card with modified firmware to great effect when I only had WiFi for internet at the barracks in Japan in the 00&#x27;s. I was absolutely outside of the legal limits on power, which I didn&#x27;t really know at the time.<p>Extreme contention when 250 people had 3 APs as their only connection and half were trying to play WoW at the same time.
    • NDlurker2 hours ago
      And no passwords! That&#x27;s how I got Internet as a broke college student living off campus.
  • bombcar2 hours ago
    I’m pretty sure I’ve connected to a bog-standard Mikrotik Metal over a thousand feet. The surprise wasn’t that it connected, it was that the phone could transmit back.
  • Dylan1680750 minutes ago
    I wonder why the yagi fell off so suddenly. It had pretty good height.
  • canpan2 hours ago
    Not about range, but speed. Wifi is surprisingly slow. I noticed downloading a model from the internet (Huggingface) to my Desktop (connected by LAN cable) is faster than copying it from said Desktop to the laptop in the same room via Wifi.
    • pwarner2 hours ago
      Latency seems higher, much higher sometimes, and variable. I need to complete the LAN cable runs I started long ago :-)
    • mgillett542 hours ago
      Depends on the WiFi, you can easily get 1Gbps on WiFi 7 as long as your modem + access point have the bandwidth
      • fragmede1 hour ago
        Yeah. I ran a hand crimped cat-5 Ethernet run to my office and speed tested it, and it turns out my wifi is faster, according to speed.cloudflare.com. Haven&#x27;t had a chance to debug that yet, but there&#x27;s a switch and some other wiring in the way.