digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About
See the original image at gizmodo.com

Scientist Set World Record for Fastest Wireless Transmission

gizmodo.com — The scientists, based in Pisa, claim that during an uninterrupted 12-hour experiment, they achieved throughput speeds above 1.2 Terabits per second

Who dugg this? Made popular Sep 15, 2008

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

75 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • electrolemon, on 09/14/2008, -4/+711.21 JIGGAWATTS
  • yessuz, on 09/15/2008, -1/+41That's 150 G Bytes/s.
    That's like 190 DVDRiP movies from piratebay per second.. whoohoo!
  • inactive, on 09/15/2008, -2/+36They just made a giant frisbee of Blurays and threw it across the room. Continuously for 12 hours, the insane amount of data of the Bluray frisbee means it comes to about 1.2tbps
  • dawnraid101, on 09/15/2008, -0/+28I always wondered how they wrote the data they received, to disk (no disk has 1.2tbps access speeds) or do they just write it to the RAM, or what.
  • V1ncent, on 09/14/2008, -1/+27Downloading the Internet was never this easy!
  • lucy22, on 09/14/2008, -2/+28Now if only my computer was that fast, ha!
  • jwstark, on 09/15/2008, -2/+25Ah, it's just line of sight transmission, not that cool.
  • HarChim, on 09/15/2008, -0/+17Awesome. I can reach my Comcast cap in a fraction of a second.
  • InfiniteNothing, on 09/15/2008, -0/+14Yes. It's more or less generate random data in ram, transmit, read random data into ram, check the check sum, dump data
  • dha07030, on 09/15/2008, -2/+15No ***** you, two of my friends died due to lack of originality.
  • connieLingus, on 09/15/2008, -0/+11that is **WAY** faster then the frontside bus speed of most modern processors....1066Mhz (~1Ghz) x 64-bit = 64gbps compared to 1200Gbps.

    what the heck to they do with all that data? they better have a huge cache somewhere.
  • inactive, on 09/14/2008, -2/+13Check it out! The original source article itself!
    http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http://www ...
  • fate3, on 09/15/2008, -3/+13lol the best part was this from the comments:

    "Unfortunately, none of the scientists had any gaming skillz so they were still roundly schooled at Halo 3 by a foul-mouthed 11 year-old from Fredericksburg, who spent the better part of an hour alternately blowing them up and teabagging them."
  • inactive, on 09/15/2008, -0/+10It might eventually apply to the internet in the future. It's called "progress."
  • drmangrum, on 09/15/2008, -1/+10As opposed to having to go through multiple routers, bouncing off a satellite, going through yet more routers and then finally to your computer.

    In other words, it doesn't matter how fast data gets from A->B if B->C is still slow.
  • cmsjustin, on 09/15/2008, -3/+12As opposed to making it curve over a mountain?
  • RealmDown, on 09/15/2008, -1/+9Disc too shall pass.
  • dmanmax99, on 09/15/2008, -1/+9Take that Michael Phelps! Scientists can break speed records too.
  • cmsjustin, on 09/15/2008, -0/+7The point is that this line-of-sight is faster than the previous line-of-site, which will lead to B->C being faster one day
  • InfiniteNothing, on 09/15/2008, -0/+6Do you usually stay within LOS of your wifi hot spots? If you have LOS you are essentially just replacing a fiber cable with a laser.
  • InspectorGadget, on 09/15/2008, -4/+9♪♪♪ It's a bird...it's a plane...it's lack of foresight pessimist man! ♪♪♪ Is there any bag he can't douche? Stay tuned for next week's episode!
  • inactive, on 09/15/2008, -0/+5It can download it in a fraction of a second. My guess would be yes.
  • SixOrSoPapers, on 09/15/2008, -1/+6Asked what they plan to use the wireless connection for, the researchers simply shrugged and said "check email, maybe browse the web a little."
  • ACiDGRiM, on 09/15/2008, -0/+4at 150 GB/s assuming there is 1 website at 30GB for every 1000 people on the earth on average, it would only take about 15 days to download the entire internet. (Not counting sites like rapidshare and Porn sites)

    6.2billion/1000*30GB/60/60/24

    Not lets assume that its about 100GB per site, then it would take just a little over a month (42 days).

    6.2billion/1000*100GB/60/60/24
  • inactive, on 09/15/2008, -3/+7This is just an optical connection without an optical cable like you'd find on your home stereo. It only works if there are no obstructions between the sender and receiver and they have to be within line of site. Anyone walks in betweem the two, and you lose your connection. This is hardly very usefull to most consumers and has only limited commercial applications as it is.
  • InsaneOni, on 09/15/2008, -1/+5I fail to see how this is news. It's just using a laser to transmit data. Same thing as fiber optics but without the cable, so in other words, less useful.
  • SixOrSoPapers, on 09/15/2008, -1/+5GREAT SCOTT!
  • wiak2, on 09/15/2008, -1/+5more than one processor?
  • opticwind, on 09/15/2008, -1/+5*takes off glasses*

    My God...we could literally email each other the porn. Not specific porn...ALL the porn.
  • derekcannon, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3Too bad current hard drives can't record that quickly :(
  • ASSASSYN360, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4I read on the second run they were capped by their ISP.
  • yayster, on 09/15/2008, -1/+4"In order to transmit the same amount of information on paper, they would have to arrange for a 747 cargo freighter packed with telephone books and encyclopedias to power-dive into their unit every couple of minutes, forever."
  • ufee, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3Thats nearly 9 TB a minute. Enough porn to last a lifetime.

    God I'm good at math.
  • bullox, on 09/15/2008, -0/+3There are a lot more applications for wireless than just the internet.
  • CTK14A, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2'Enough porn to last a lifetime'

    Says you.
  • simquad, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2In 10 years time we'll look back and say...ONLY 1.2TBS?
  • xsecretfiles, on 09/15/2008, -2/+4Damn you Comcast, we could've had so much fun together :(

  • ploop, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2Multiple processors in a system tend to share front-side busses, do they not? (At least on a PC...)
  • leerayIG88, on 09/15/2008, -0/+2look out for that bird!
  • ultrafez, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2Nothing can beat the CPIP.
    http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/
  • inactive, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2That comment just made me laugh 'til I spit up. You win!
  • ufee, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1That's what radiation does, man. Such a tragedy :(
  • TexasShiv, on 09/15/2008, -2/+3Pics or it didn't happen.
  • Barryke, on 09/16/2008, -0/+1Chicken.
  • inactive, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1As i found your statement funny, i think he meant, "Ah, it's just line of sight transmission, not a radio transmission like A/B/G/N.
  • bbliss17, on 09/15/2008, -0/+1Well that would be nice if this could actually happen but nothing will come of this!
  • Barryke, on 09/16/2008, -0/+1Note "Fastest Wireless Transmission", nope that'd be "the cosmos"
    Receiving the data is the part part.
  • rationalist, on 09/15/2008, -1/+2Whoosh!
  • kimsung, on 09/15/2008, -1/+1oh, my poor ADSL...
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 78 of 78 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.