Google wants to spread the net with Balloons

[sawakosadako]

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2042120/googles-audacious-project-loon-wants-to-spread-the-net-with-high-flying-balloons.html

http://www.google.com/loon/

What do you guys think? I always think the internet should be included as one of the basic of human's rights, so I'm definitely supporting this project. I just hope that it will be free.

[megido-rev.M]

The idea appeals to me somehow.

Also, a loon is a bird.

[gits]

Awesome idea but I am not all that enthusiastic about google doing it.

[kitamesume]

bandwidth, latency and packet consistency, three major concerns to create a satisfactory internet.

how is this any different from satellites though.

[megido-rev.M]

One is flying and the other is free falling?

[Tiffanys]

Awesome idea but I am not all that enthusiastic about google doing it.

But think of the targeted ads! "You like to pee in your back yard. How about the brand new Backyard Pee Master 5000?!"

[sawakosadako]

Awesome idea but I am not all that enthusiastic about google doing it.

But think of the targeted ads! "You like to pee in your back yard. How about the brand new Backyard Pee Master 5000?!"

If it's not free. I guess It's pretty stupid for us to pay to have UMD all over us.

[megido-rev.M]

[logos]

"The delivery method? High-flying, Internet-spewing balloons. "
fuck yeah, I dont care if it does cost and isnt reliable, the idea is awesome, and gg google for trying to be innovative/trying to take over the world

how is this any different from satellites though.

satellites for internet are 22miles above the earth and google's balloons would be ~11miles above the earth, so half the distance for your signal to travel, which means half the latency (satellite internet gets at best ~600 ping or something ridiculously high like that) and half that would be almost tolerable.

Not to mention the cost of sending up balloons is probably way cheaper than satellites and you probably wouldnt need a satellite dish to receive the signal.

[kitamesume]

i understand the pros of the balloons, but satellite's cost isn't really gonna be that much more since coverage is quite wide, one satellite would be enough to send signals to the entire europe.

and no i do think you'd still need a a dish transceiver to use the balloons, a regular 10dbi directional antenna has a leash of mostly a quarter mile at most, only good from building to building.

[Tiffanys]

Personally I think it's kinda stupid and will be an eyesore if it ever happens.

[sawakosadako]

"The delivery method? High-flying, Internet-spewing balloons. "
fuck yeah, I dont care if it does cost and isnt reliable, the idea is awesome, and gg google for trying to be innovative/trying to take over the world

how is this any different from satellites though.

satellites for internet are 22miles above the earth and google's balloons would be ~11miles above the earth, so half the distance for your signal to travel, which means half the latency (satellite internet gets at best ~600 ping or something ridiculously high like that) and half that would be almost tolerable.

Not to mention the cost of sending up balloons is probably way cheaper than satellites and you probably wouldnt need a satellite dish to receive the signal.

Are you sure it's 22 miles above the earth? Isn't there bluejet in that range?

PS: I'm gonna be a lot more interested if this is for eco friendly electricity.

[megido-rev.M]

Balloons are pretty easy to make, unlike satellites.

[kitamesume]

Balloons are pretty easy to make, unlike satellites.

not the equipment that'll be mounted on it, it must be light-weight to reduce the physical size of the balloon.
as one would expect, the larger the balloon is, the higher the maintenance cost would become.

[Freedom Kira]

satellites for internet are 22miles above the earth and google's balloons would be ~11miles above the earth, so half the distance for your signal to travel, which means half the latency (satellite internet gets at best ~600 ping or something ridiculously high like that) and half that would be almost tolerable.

First off, the distance is approximately 22 thousand miles, not 22 miles. And second, communications to satellites are done using EMR, which travels at the speed of light. The distance to travel is clearly not the cause for the high latency, because light can travel that distance in about 100-125ms.

[Mistgun_Zero]

You need a receiver which looks like a red basketball on top of your house. just saying.

[gits]

satellites for internet are 22miles above the earth and google's balloons would be ~11miles above the earth, so half the distance for your signal to travel, which means half the latency (satellite internet gets at best ~600 ping or something ridiculously high like that) and half that would be almost tolerable.

First off, the distance is approximately 22 thousand miles, not 22 miles. And second, communications to satellites are done using EMR, which travels at the speed of light. The distance to travel is clearly not the cause for the high latency, because light can travel that distance in about 100-125ms.

125ms to sattelite 125ms back and then the processing of information...

[kitamesume]

satellites for internet are 22miles above the earth and google's balloons would be ~11miles above the earth, so half the distance for your signal to travel, which means half the latency (satellite internet gets at best ~600 ping or something ridiculously high like that) and half that would be almost tolerable.

First off, the distance is approximately 22 thousand miles, not 22 miles. And second, communications to satellites are done using EMR, which travels at the speed of light. The distance to travel is clearly not the cause for the high latency, because light can travel that distance in about 100-125ms.

125ms to sattelite 125ms back and then the processing of information...

uhh you're confusing stuffs, receiving info doesn't require a round-trip, thats why theres upload and download.
rather its like this "client -> satellite -> server" and vice versa.

edit: the question though, can the mounted transceivers handle millions of connections? since theres also handling latency which is proportional to how fast will your packet go through.
as one would expect, the larger the populace accessing the transceiver the longer the queue becomes.
even enterprise routers chokes from time to time when theres massive data accesses, they're bulky and heavy to boot.

[Xycolian2332]

They'd have to have shit on those baloons that measures how high they are in the air and the rate at which they're falling, so they can estimate where it will land and send someone to the estimated destination ahead of time, or else someone will take the equipment.

That's a lot of effort (I.E money)

[megido-rev.M]

My intuition tells me that is only a secondary concern.