• Septimaeus@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      Which, come to think of it, is essentially the tin can method, just with conversion to an electrical signal that preserves fidelity over longer distances than kinetic vibrations on a string.

      • Eheran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Well, if we ignore everything… you get sound from A to B. Essentially like a smartphone :D

        • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          Lol look I’m all for pointless belligerence and poindextering online, and do it myself often, but (a) I’m gonna go out on a limb and say commenter above probably doesn’t think they’re actually the same, and regardless (b) things don’t have to be precisely the same to make abstract comparisons that aid understanding or help learn something new.

          For example, your smartphone comparison. Some have a programmable RF transponder that passively converts a nearby RF pulse into a digital reply. They can read other transponders as well. If you and a friend agreed on a cipher, you could pretend to be secret agents by taking turns programming a brief “text,” switching off the device and leaving it on your desk for the other to scan as they pass by. It’s bidirectional and point to point with passive transmission, but it’s wireless and powered by electromagnetic waves rather than acoustic :D see? It’s fun.

          Edit: spelling