this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2026
69 points (98.6% liked)
Asklemmy
52408 readers
304 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Why do I get the feeling that I'm arguing a pointless argument with an LLM? I'm going to put the good-faith effort in for this comment but I'm not going any further.
Yes, that kind of approach can help ensure that open source projects are sustainably maintained.
It's open source. You always run the risk that you might have to do a hard-fork of any open source software regardless of who maintains it.
Yeah, but that's true of virtually all methods of communication. That's a regulatory problem, not a meshtastic or reticulum problem. There is nothing specific about meshtastic/reticulum that makes it resistant to Government censorship. The best you could possibly do with reticulum is stick some messages on a USB drive and pass them to someone else - but then why not just FAT32 format the drive and send your friend some files? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sneakernet
I feel like you're arguing in bad faith here. I've been trying to help you understand some of the benefits/drawbacks of Reticulum and Meshtastic, not argue that one is inherently better than the other.
LoRa licenses the technology out. You're not buying the device directly from them. It's a standard, basically an identifiable brand.
The reason that meshtastic and reticulum are designed primarily to be work over LoRa is because Governments and businesses have done the hard work of setting standards and legislating free and open portions of the spectrum which end-users don't have to pay to use. This opened up the realistic possibility of private medium-to-long range mesh networks existing in the first place.
Also, do you know that Meshtastic uses a queue messaging format which can be routed over UDP/TCP just like reticulum?
The main first use-case for LoRa was IoT devices where low power is a requirement. Think things like monitoring when gates are open/closed, what the soil temperature is, how much Nitrogen is in soil, etc. I think there are likely waaaay more low power nodes out there than nodes in people's homes.
It's great that you're doing some research and have some ideas that you want to try out, but I think you could probably do with doing a bit more research to shore up your reasoning.