• 0 Posts
  • 169 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: July 22nd, 2023
  • mariusafa@lemmy.sdf.orgtoPrivacy@lemmy.ml•Is WiFi calling a decent alternative to VoIP?
    2·
    11 days ago

    Yeah I would also want that but a radio network without sector and base station sectioning but it is unfeasible. Frequency spectrum is limited and scarce, sectoring is used in order to share the same frequencies between neighboring base stations. Thus a rough positioning is intrinsic on the system.

    Completely anonymous radio link requires a unique radio " address " for each terminal. This is not possible because you need multiple base stations in order to cover big areas, thus you need multiple limited frequencies.

    WiFi is a good example. It’s concept is very similar to cellular networks but in small scale (well or it was designed for small scale). WiFi access points suppose they have a more or less clear frequency (from other WiFi stations), with that in consideration they can search for any device that responds for a given address.

    But notice that in the modern days new WiFi standards have come up. This is because now we have tons of WiFi AP per building, per house, the freq band is limited too. Modern WiFi implementations are copying the cellular designs with OFDMA. They are starting to use sectoring and MIMO techniques in order to separate the WiFi coverage in sectors.

    From a telecommunications point of view cellular networks are better and more efficient that legacy WiFi implementations.

    The problem is that because of this some knowledge about the positioning of the terminal can be known. But so do it with modern WiFi.

    Again the problem is not the technology but how we use it. Do we have laws that respect user privacy? Nowadays you can geolocate someone by their IP because most ISP nodes are gelocated in order to map network shortages.

    Tracking does not depend on you after all. Any station to which you are connected knows you are near them and since most stations.know where they are they also rougly know where are you.

    The problem resides in the way we protect our data. Should users be linked to terminals? Well always that you identify yourself from a terminal you are somehow telling that you ARE that terminal.

    The problem here is trying to separate the user part from the rest. We must focus on techniques that allow a user to identify themselves in an a remote service without linking it to its real terminal. Tor does that in a way by separating layer by layer.

    Is a complex deal. Just be aware of this issues and try to not be fooled by the WiFi VoIP is the new thing super mega privacy. Because when you think you are safe is when you get stabbed in the back.

  • mariusafa@lemmy.sdf.orgtoPrivacy@lemmy.ml•Is WiFi calling a decent alternative to VoIP?
    10·
    12 days ago

    This VoIP vs cellular doesn’t have sense. Cellular networks are only link layer. They stablish low level telecom techniques to be able to transport any data to a cellular mobile belonging to the cellular net. The main difference with other link layer aproaches like wifi, ethernet, bluetooth, etc. Is that terminals are linked to a net of base stations in order to keep the best connection to the net at all times from every posible place. In order to do that each base station needs to know which terminals (phone numbers) are in his vicinity and in which sector. This way the cellular network knows where to look for when searching for a given terminal.

    VoIP is an application layer service. Which means you can use VoIP over link layers like bluetooth, wifi, ethernet, cellular network. There’s no VoIP vs cellular network. Cellular network can carry VoIP data because cellular network can carry IP datagrams. All modern cellular network use VoIP as their way to carry the voice information over the net and to maintain connection.

    Wifi calling vs VoIP also makes no sense. You can do VoIP on wifi. Wifi is a link layer it can carry any digital data encapsulated.

    What I understand you are saying is using VoIP through Wifi instead of using VoIP over cellular network.

    In order to help a bit more, this are some.VoIP services:

    Discord. Linephone Skype. Mumble.

  • mariusafa@lemmy.sdf.orgtoFree and Open Source Software@beehaw.org•Free Software Is Under Attack! (Will You Help Defend It?)
    2·
    22 days ago

    Free Software and it’s communities should stay focused on Free Software topics only.

    It’s better not to mix software. RMS critiques should not be brought through the FS communities because then we lose the meaning of those communities.

    Critiques are okay, bring them in political communities. Don’t mix concepts.

    I know it’s hard to accept but someone political views does not affect their views on Free Software. Cancelling people in one topic does not implies that he is wrong in every other topic he is active.

    It’s stupid to think that choosing dubious ideas in one topic suddenly makes this individual not eligible for any other topic. That is a cross topic cancelation that does not have any sense.

    This cross topic cancelation is wrong. For example I may not agree with Lemmy devs about their political views, but yet I appreciate them for their Lemmy development, etc. I may critique them on political communities, but that doesn’t mean that they should be canceled from developing Lemmy or any free software project.

    For example Heisenberg and other scientific people were aligned with the Nazis in WWII. That doesn’t mean that their scientific development and image has to be canceled because of their political views. Yes it’s hard to accept, but it’s what is reasonable. Topics are separated naturally. If you knew Heisenberg only for his scientific development then you would think he is a great scientific. If you later knew what he did politically that wouldn’t change the fact that he is a great scientific.

    Do not try to mix topics that are not related.