• NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    82
    ·
    1 year ago

    I would love to watch this person glaze over while I explain that they both run at 2.4 ghz and are thus identical as far as radiation goes. The EM spectrum isn’t that complicated a concept, I don’t know why it’s such black magic to so many

    • macaroni1556@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      1 year ago

      Bluetooth is, not a joke, named after King Harald Bluetooth. He was a viking, who united many Norse tribes, you know with all the pillaging they are known for.

      • can@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh wow you’re serious

        The name “Bluetooth” was proposed in 1997 by Jim Kardach of Intel, one of the founders of the Bluetooth SIG. The name was inspired by a conversation with Sven Mattisson who related Scandinavian history through tales from Frans G. Bengtsson’s The Long Ships, a historical novel about Vikings and the 10th-century Danish king Harald Bluetooth. Upon discovering a picture of the runestone of Harald Bluetooth in the book A History of the Vikings by Gwyn Jones, Kardach proposed Bluetooth as the codename for the short-range wireless program which is now called Bluetooth.

    • PopShark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      After the final fight was over and the dust had settled, a faint robotic female voice could be heard on a full moon at midnight if you repeat “this technology is way too widely used for how little bandwidth it can reliably carry it’s just not good for data transfer or high quality audio/video” three times….

      ze Blueeetoooth device is ready to peaarr

  • MeshPotato@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    I know someone that would use a microwave to heat up food. But would literally run away from it whenever she used it and only come back after the set time passed.

    • CameronDev@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      That is at least somewhat logical, if not a bit overly paranoid. A microwave can cause damage if the shielding is damaged, wifi cant ever cause damage.

        • Lodespawn@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          Most consumer grade routers (and enterprise grade access points for that matter) are unable to produce more than 1W. Even with a higher gain factory antenna you might be radiating maybe 30W. There is no conceivable length of time that you could be exposed to that radiation and suffer ill effects from it. I’d be surprised if it was even enough heat the air around it.

        • brianorca@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No, radio waves are not ionizing. (Unlike, for example, ultraviolet or X-ray.) Ionizing radiation can cause cumulative damage, because each photon quanta has enough energy to potentially change organic molecules. But low frequencies such as radio waves, (anything lower than visible light) can’t change your molecules. The most they can do is heat you up, just like visible or infrared light. So unless the radio transmitter is high powered, (such as a microwave) the radio waves won’t do any more than the lightbulb in your room. I’m assuming you don’t live in a dark cave.

      • Fosheze@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Most microwaves (especially old ones) are shielded very poorly. However microwave radiation is nonionizing so the only harm it is going to do to you is burns if you get hit by enough of it. Needless to say you aren’t going to get hit by that much no matter how poorly shielded your microwave is. The worst any consumer microwave will do is screw up your wifi reception around it.