this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2026
185 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

82460 readers
3968 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Oisteink@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (12 children)

And what are we downloading? Is the cloud dead? Why do i need 15gbps on my phone? Is it made for consoles and their relentless 120gb patches?

[–] undefined@lemmy.hogru.ch 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

In the US we’ll do anything but build fiber with the billions we tossed at the telecom industry.

[–] BluescreenOfDeath@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Putting fiber in the ground is expensive. I work for an ISP, and we estimate fiber overbuild costs at $15/ft. So a mile of underground fiber costs about $79,200.

[–] Sarmyth@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Yup. That's why we gave them all that money years ago to do it. It was cheaper then too.

[–] cmnybo@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

For home use, all I can think of is wireless video. 15 GB/s is faster than the fastest DisplayPort or HDMI versions. It could handle any resolution and refresh rate currently in use without any compression. That would be useful for VR headsets since they need low latency.

[–] Oisteink@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah - that covers about 1/100000 users

[–] phar@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I'm pretty sure anyone using an HDMI cable could appreciate having no cables except power.

[–] cravl@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

On the flip side, if you still need a power cable anyway, it's usually way cheaper to bundle the media (and optionally control/network) signals into the same cable than using wireless. (Sidenote: Honestly it's kinda weird to me that we haven't seen hardly any of this in consumer spaces. The newer USB-C revisions could easily supply power, display, audio, and network to the average TV over one cable.)

Now, with true wireless power (I'm thinking of this video in particular), that proposition can change dramatically.

[–] heyWhatsay@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 month ago

One example I've read, was to remotely drive autonomous vehicles, and feed back all data collected from cameras and sensors. I'm not a fan of it being used this way, but it would mostly serve that kind of purpose.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 month ago

Big data needs that, so it can spy you better.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

Everything, no, to move data quicker, no

[–] DSN9@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

The distribution of all human knowledge, untampered.

[–] msage@programming.dev 1 points 1 month ago

VR headset streaming video from PC without cables.

[–] kalleboo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Laptops have all but taken over from desktops for everything but AAA gaming. New houses are still built with zero Ethernet because "the internet is Wi-Fi right?"

People are using their laptops to edit video off of a NAS, MacBooks can run 100 GB LLMs. Heck even non-AAA games are many gigabytes.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

For phones / portables, assuming it doesn't draw more power, it would mean shorter download times, which means less battery usage.

[–] Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

"Assuming it doesn't draw more power" has got to be the problem here, right? I don't know much about wireless technology but from a purely physical stabdpoint, faster signals means higher frequencies, which means higher energies, which means more draw from the battery. Yes, shorter active time means less draw, but it's like that swiss cheese joke:

Swiss cheese has holes.

More cheese = more holes

More holes = less cheese

Therefore,

More cheese = less cheese.

[–] potatogamer@ttrpg.network -1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

More bandwidth available for users means more people can do more things on the internet and at a higher quality.

If cell phone speeds are high enough, then we should be able to transition from wired internet which is not available to a lot of people to only using cell networks.

It's also not going to be 15gbps per device.

[–] n3m37h@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 month ago

1.5gb/s is way more than enough for the average person. Hell, 200Mb/s is more than enough. That would only be 10 min.