The IEEE has now formally approved the 802.11ac -2013 update which boasts as much as 7 Gbps of data in the 5 GHz spectrum. The 802.11ac -2013 update is an addendum to the initial 802.11ac specification, which in 2013 began to emerge in both enterprise and consumer devices as the next generation of wireless, following the widely deployed 802.11n standard.
Interesting. I'm, however, not convinced that WiFi is safe. I do agree that it is very convenient, but I fear that such electromagnetic emmisions might have health issues tied with them. So I stick with wires and even pulled the WiFi module out of my router to be safe
(basic rule of thumb - when pre-industrial people did not experienced this, then it should be more criticaly examined first, but no-one seems to do it… still, with warning signs and limits of EMI I would bet that humans aren not exactly ready to be bombarded with such frequencies on daily basic... It might be extreme precaution, but I rather go to the trouble with wires.)
Sadly, mi 100MBi wires are somewhat slower that the alleged 7Gbps speeds announced there, witch looks that WiFi get faster that old conventional wired network What a shame! Time to move to 1GBy network at least, lol.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RF energy as "possibly carcinogenic to humans". Although, if kept within manufacture spec they are considered safe. I personally do not run my router at spec, I have my wireless tx power boosted by 29 to 100, the legal limit in Canada IIRC.
So far, all scientific studies have shown that normal EMI exposure does not cause an increase in health risks. Besides, even if YOU dont use devices emitting EMI, the rest of the world does Trust me, you're still getting bombarded with lots of waves daily.
As to the wired/wireless issue, most modern PC's and routers run GB ethernet which is pritty much guaranteed for transfer speeds. This 'mythical' 7GB wireless speed I would love to see in real world application. Ive never gotten even close to max throughput on ANY of the wireless specs to date.
I agree with you Sagath, I have tried different adapters and different routers and I cannot get close to the mythical 300 Mbps offered by wireless N. I would be impressed with AC if I could get 500-900 Mbps consistently over say 7 Gbps burst over 10 seconds.
I agree that the marketed speeds are way off for the real world results. These numbers just have no real value and do not correspond in reality at all. But still things seems to progress into faster usage, witch is good.
On the other hand, I'm very skeptical about what is safe level.
Trust me, you're still getting bombarded with lots of waves daily.
Since the beginning of the radio, yes, humans and everything on the planet is getting under EMI pressure. And I dubt that this is healty at all. However it is the level of the bombardment, that increase almost exponentially when for home networking WiFi is used. That is why I rather stay with wires - even they emit some EMI (as well, as almost every consumer electronic device) - but WiFi is designed to emit them on purpose and on far uncomparable intensity, that bogles my mind, that there are not made some independent, publicaly verifiable study on the effects of this on living things.
Student Science Experiment Finds Plants won’t Grow near Wi-Fi Router
The girls noticed that if they slept with their mobile phones near their heads at night, they often had difficulty concentrating at school the next day. (…) ...the cress seeds placed near the router had not grown. Many of them were completely dead.
Cannot verify this, as I have no WiFi device and my router got even his WiFi card extracted from it, as I sit kinda near to it, so, better be safe than sorry. I rather take the inconvience of the wires...
Because since this is quite big bussiness and the "safety" of this is preached by same people, that could tell you, that Mercury in vaccines are healty:
K-Eye Report: Mercury Is Good For Your Children – 00:54
Sure, approved by FDA = safe. In my view, FDA approval is almost a declaration of greed, instead of safety guarantee. A good example could be approved GMO corn and rat labs growing horrific cancers when feed by it:
…severe organ damage... up to 50% of males and 70% of females suffered premature death...
Also if someone says that these news are old, and now mercury is not in the vaccines, then there is this simple 30 sec dose of truth:
So IMHO the bottom line is, that we really don't know much about the safety of exposing to serious EMI and I better not find out that on myself
I'm not sure how it is in CZ, but in Canada there is literally WLAN covering every inch of almost every city, so whether you have a WLAN or not, you're still being exposed to the same amount of energy on a daily basis unless you live in the middle of no where.
Hell even in the middle of nowhere there is wireless. If there wasnt…I wouldnt have internet access at all!
As for AC. If previous wireless stds are anything to go by, expect 20-25% of the rated number for real world....and even then only at short distances. The upside to the new wireless std is beam forming, so no more spewing all over the place...more like focused nut roasting if you 'cross the streams'.
I'm not sure how it is in CZ, but in Canada there is literally WLAN covering every inch of almost every city…
Prerov is a small city, 50k of peoples even with neighbourding villages, so we are out of the range Yes, we have some WiFi coverage, but mostly center of the city is covered. I'm nearly on the end, close to woods. And the intensity drop with square on the distance, so I would be worried about home antena much more that about outside antenas. However all that is pure theoretic, since there probably never be any reasonably well done study, so… It might not be anything to worry about, it might have some slight impact, but not dramatic... or it might be dangerous in the long run. We seems to find out with time
There is, of course, a funny way to look at this too:
Unfortunately, this is just a joke. In fact, the cancer ratio goes up up up all the time:
But the cells ratio far exceed it:
Hence the health impacts are likely not VERY serious, at least when speaking about cancer. On the other hand, since 1990 are at the cancer ratio somewhat visible acceleration of the number of cases, so there might be some reason for it.
But I would not overlook the huge impacts of other things that are happening around 1990. For example the end of the bipolar world in fall of 1989 that caused the capitalism is no longer "in check" and could take it's gloves off. Also the bombing with depleted uranium of Yugoslavia and Iraq, etc. All these could have impact as well, as the Tchernobyl incident from 1986…
So it would be early to blame WiFi for everything and I did not do it. I just better stay with the "damn wires"
And I'm not the only one, expressing doubts:
A wireless warning
Wi-Fi may be useful, but the technology hasn't been around long enough for us to know how safe it really is.
"I am no luddite - this new technology is astounding, exciting and it changes peoples lives."
"…there is no conclusive evidence to suggest that this "low-level radiation" could be harmful. Of course not. This technology hasn't been around long enough for us to know how safe it really is and most of the research that has been conducted has been funded by the telecoms industry. But put it this way - if a pharmaceutical company came up with some wonder drug which could eliminate obesity or headaches overnight, would the government allow them to flood our schools and cities (as it is doing with Wi-Fi) before it had been conclusively tested and proved to be safe?"
Some people have even more radical views on WiFi and comparing the measurments give then some grounds for it:
Wi-Fi in Schools: Testing for Microwave Radiation Dangers in the Classroom – 14:52
Olle Johansson, Kalifornia institute did not like this stuff either:
WAKE UP CALL from electrosmog expert Olle Johansson – 07:08