
Future Smartphones Won’t Need Cell Towers to Connect - cjdulberger
http://www.technologyreview.com/news/530996/future-smartphones-wont-need-cell-towers-to-connect/
======
sbierwagen
I much prefer GAN (Wifi Calling)
([http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_Access_Network](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generic_Access_Network))
to LTE Direct. LTE runs on licensed spectrum, which means the licenseholder
(the cell network) can squeeze you for as much money as they want. Unlicensed
spectrum is always cheaper, and you hardly need LTE's range advantage for
femtocells. Why use licensed spectrum for short-range stuff?

I also find it suspicious that this article emphasizes how much buy-in LTE
Direct has from gigantic corporations, without making much of a case for why
actual endusers would like it. A good clue is that there's no equivalent for
Wifi MAC randomization (which iOS 8 does by default) in LTE Direct: spoofing
your IMEI is a federal crime. There's no way to avoid being tracked by LTE
Direct femtocells, short of shutting off your phone and sticking it in a metal
box.

~~~
zwieback
Not defending phone operators but the problem with unlicensed spectrum is
precisely that it's unlicensed. You're power limited and everyone and his
uncle messes up the spectrum.

~~~
woah
Is that a problem? My wifi works great on the limited garbage spectrum that it
has been allowed to operate on. I think spectrum licensing served an important
purpose in the days when everything was analog, but now it's just a way to get
a great return on investments in lobbyists.

~~~
wglb
How does digital change this? It is still subject to interference, noise, and
bandwidth limitations.

------
tokenadult
So something like "push to talk" is coming back to mobile phones. The more
things change, the more they stay the same. Oh, maybe push-to-talk has never
gone away.[1] (It's not a feature offered by my cell phone carrier.)

The article kindly submitted here with the interesting new news about phone-
to-phone LTE communication reports, "In theory, LTE Direct could be used to
create communication apps that route all data from device to device. Some chat
apps can already use Wi-Fi and Bluetooth to link up nearby phones, but LTE
Direct could offer extended range and better performance. However, carriers
will control which devices on their networks can use LTE Direct because it
uses the same radio spectrum as conventional cellular links. Wireless carriers
might even gain a new stream of revenue by charging companies that want to
offer services or apps using the technology, Qualcomm says." As usual, the
actual implementation of this service will be all about carrier policies and
business agreements.

[1]
[http://www.verizonwireless.com/support/faqs/PushtoTalk/faq.h...](http://www.verizonwireless.com/support/faqs/PushtoTalk/faq.html)

------
drcube
Isn't this just a cellular mesh network? How does it compare to wifi mesh
networking as far as range, security and usefulness? I'd like to see more of
these decentralized alternatives to monopoly infrastructure providers, I'm
just not sure how feasible they are.

~~~
rayiner
LTE Direct is more about service discovery than data transfer.

As for mesh networking, it's hard. Routing becomes extremely complicated,
especially when you're talking about mobile nodes. I used to work on protocol
design for cognitive radios, where you have the added complexity of not having
guaranteed spectrum. Mesh networks have certain advantages there,[1] but when
we moved to a base station model things got exponentially simpler.

Distributed mesh networks are interesting in theory, but you have to be
willing to pay a huge tax in terms of overhead and complexity.

[1] Say you have two nodes that, locally, never have common channels
available. If you had a third node that shared at least one common channel
with each, you could have it flip between the common channels to route data
between nodes that otherwise can't talk to each other.

------
wahsd
With facebook working on mesh-networking we can be assured that it will be
corrupted and heinous. I don't quite understand how the tech community could
just simply capitulate freedom, liberty, and anonymity to a malevolent demon
like Facebook.

------
jewel
This would be fantastic for disaster situations if coupled with the right
software. If the radios can speak on unlicenced spectrum, it'd open up even
more possibilities. For example, you could have a "cellular" connection on all
your devices, and not just your cell phone.

See [http://stevenjewel.com/2014/01/android-
mesh/](http://stevenjewel.com/2014/01/android-mesh/) for some of my ramblings
along these same lines from earlier this year.

~~~
voltagex_
Have you seen the Serval project? There may have been a talk at LCAU this year
about adding a little USB dongle to extend mesh networks over 433MHz(?)

------
linker3000
"Some see the technology as a potential new channel for targeted promotions or
advertising."

A fair amount of the article is devoted to the potential for advertising,
tracking and 'user experience' \- which often equates to 'we will encourage
you to buy something'.

I hope this feature has an 'off' switch or a set of granular user preferences.

~~~
Animats
It probably means that, like some "free" WiFi services, you have to watch an
ad before you get to connect.

------
benguild
Nice! I’m sure Japan and South Korea would be awesome early deployment targets
since nearly everywhere has such blazing fast internet to use as a backbone.

