Notices by 🇳🇴 Thor — backup account (thorthenorseman@octodon.social), page 69

@nobody However, propagation is complete guesswork if you don't have accurate information about construction materials. My simulator can do various materials but, yeah, it doesn't match real life measurements very well, and I think it's because of the reasons I stated above.

@nobody I made my own. Thus these toots.

Two guys hired by the power company came to connect two new fibre broadband lines to the house today.

They run the fibre along the power lines to connection boxes and then down tubes into the ground to each house.

They informed me that they rarely run multicables for fiber to residences, so they had to pull an extra cable for the new subscriptions. That new cable only had two fibres in it. They don't make any more infrastructure than necessary.

My method so far has been to start in the center of the space that needs coverage, and if there are dead spots, try to figure out why and revise the placement until there's decent coverage everywhere, and if that doesn't work, try with two access points, etc. It takes a while to do that, and it's more art than science, but it does work. I just wish floor plans contained more metadata.

I'm thinking that I'd have to use some kind of measurement apparatus to detect actual signal propagation through each wall in the building, but as far as I know, the only way of doing that is to place a transmitter and a receiver on either side of said walls, and at that point, you might as well just do what I did initially: Experiment with WiFi AP placement until you get a good signal in every important spot.

To ever simulate WiFi in a building with reasonable accuracy, I'd have to become an expert on comtemporary and historical building materials. This one building I'm deploying a WiFi network in is from the 1920s. Who even knows what materials and techniques they used then? Also, trends can change over the course of a decade, and not everyone will follow suit at the same pace. Also, later work has been done on it, so it gets rather complex.

Who actually falls for these, and how are they able to operate a computer?

For example, my simulator tells me that no signal could possibly penetrate what looks like a concrete wall on the floor plan, yet my measurements told me that there was coverage. The only way I can match the coverage pattern I saw in that room is if that wall is half as thick as it is on the drawing, suggesting that it's probably constructed from hollow blocks. That, or it's a wood frame with drywall on it, but in that case, the coverage should've been much better than it was.

There are a couple of things that make a WiFi simulator somewhat less useful than hoped: I'm only getting results that match real life if I start taking into account things like whether a wall is solid or hollow concrete, and the fact is: Floor plans don't contain details like that. In fact, for old houses, nobody's around to tell you what materials were used at all. You can knock a wall and make a guess about the facade, but that's it.

@clacke Hehe, jeg har vel sett diverse ting fra Sverige. På norsk TV gikk det Emil og Pippi da jeg vokste opp, og ellers så er det jo SVT1/2 og TV4 på de fleste norske kabel- og satellitt-abonnementer. Har dere norsk TV der borte?

@tmy Rorschach tests are infamous for being open to interpretation.

I was just turned down for a senior position because I have *too much* experience. 😳

@quad As for Linux: Yes. It shows, and not in a good way.

Why are spectrum analysers so horrendously expensive? All they do is sweep a tuning circuit and measure the amplitude. Radio equipment has always been stupidly expensive, and I guarantee you that it isn't because it's expensive to manufacture.

"Good riddance... After three years, they did not learn our language and they did not adopt our values!"

This cartoon is a Rorschach test for stances on immigration.

@clacke Jeg sitter generelt sett igjen med et inntrykk av at hele den vestlige verden var ganske rasistiske helt frem til holocaust ble kjent. I USAs sørstater fortsatte det i flere tiår etter det. Å ikke tro at "den hvite rase" er overlegen er som sådan ganske nytt...

Se på den rasistiske propagandaen USA laget under krigen. Det var nok ingen allierte som oppfattet krigen som en krig mot Hitlers rasisme. Det er noe vi har funnet på etterpå.

@clacke Jeg tror ikke vi kan påstå at rasisme var fremmed for nordmenn før krigen: https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenikk#Rasehygiene_i_Norge

@clacke Det var mitt eget tillegg.

Ja, dette er et punkt der nordmenn og svensker også skiller seg: Nordmenn forstår svensk bedre enn svensker forstår norsk. Det skal være gjort undersøkelser som viser dette.

@clacke Ah, språkbarriere.

@clacke Meninger som er mainstream i Norge oppfattes som sjokkerende i Sverige. Jeg syns dette er ironisk. Man pleide å snakke ironisk om denne "svenskesynden", da med henvisning til pornografi, billig alkohol og reklame-TV. Nå kan vi kanskje snakke om "norskesynden", med høyrepopulister i regjering.

Det er spesielt at vi som faktisk ble invadert av Hitler og hadde konsentrasjonsleirer er mindre hysterisk rundt dette...