Power beamed to camera via ambient wi-fi signals

Re:Power beamed to camera via ambient wi-fi signals by dmitrygr on Friday June 05, 2015 @01:25PM (#9666713)

This is incredibly idiotic. They purposefully filled the airwaves with garbage packets, to collect bare milliwatts. And the "camera" took a B&W photo at tiny resolution and sent it nowhere.

They even used already existing (and not even the best) energy harvesting chip. The only innovative thing here is somehow getting this to get posted on HN

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Power beamed to camera via ambient wi-fi signals by noipv4 on Friday June 05, 2015 @01:44PM (#9666815)

It might be better idea to use other ISM bands to power the device, and keep 2.4GHz as communications only and be a good WiFi / BT / Zigbee neighbor.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Power beamed to camera via ambient wi-fi signals by qnaal on Friday June 05, 2015 @04:00PM (#9667754)

> keep 2.4GHz as communications only

communications and heating food

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Power beamed to camera via ambient wi-fi signals by toomuchtodo on Friday June 05, 2015 @03:43PM (#9667667)

Or just inductive charging at a distance?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Power beamed to camera via ambient wi-fi signals by regeland on Friday June 05, 2015 @02:41PM (#9667215)

Completely. And the claim that "this doesn't impact wifi bandwidth" completely violates the laws of physics. As if the 2.4GHz band isn't junk enough already with noise.

And nor is this novel. Tesla did a large public demonstration of this in 1899. The only difference was the frequency and the target device (light bulb).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Power beamed to camera via ambient wi-fi signals by redindian75 on Friday June 05, 2015 @03:16PM (#9667481)

didnt the first digital camera start that way?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Power beamed to camera via ambient wi-fi signals by logicallee on Friday June 05, 2015 @02:22PM (#9667089)

black triangle.

[ Parent | on HN ]