• Possibly linux@lemmy.zipOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 months ago

      Reticulum is obscure and doesnt really have the same developed effort behind it. I also don’t really see much point in it as LoRa is slow by design.

      • Sicurio@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        You’re right that reticulum is obscure, but so was meshtastic at some point. It’s up to us to change that. I’m already quite impressed by the programs developed for reticulum and more will come as more people get eyes on it. For the last part, I feel I have to mention that reticulum isn’t limited to just LoRa nor is it limited to just text chat. It can also travel over packet radio, IP/TCP, and I2P just to name a few. Right now it can do text, voice, and image sharing. But the coolest thing I think reticulum can do is serve markdown based web pages. All encrypted as a rule. I would really encourage everyone interested in this kind of tech to consider reticulum.

        • floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Small pedantic note, Reticulum does not do text/voice/image, it is just the network layer, somewhat like OSI L2-3. LXMF or LXMS run on top of it (~L4), and finally actual applications providing media capabilities are on top of those at L7. The layering is a bit confusing at first, but I actually really like it and think it is part of its strengths - it was built to build things

      • floquant@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Reticulum is transport-agnostic, its main point is running across a dishomogeneous network that might be composed of classic copper/fiber IP links, satellite links, LoRa, laser, whatever