undefined | Better HN

0 pointssz35y ago0 comments

Well, there's diminishing returns in format shifting. The encoded barcode contains various types of quasi-redundant visual information (e.g. error correction codes) to allow decoding to happen, so for audio-based transfer it'd be better to skip the image encode and blast out the file directly.

That said... given the somewhat remarkable way fountain codes work, there's nothing stopping us from having a protocol that uses the audio and the video channels simultaneously for better throughput...

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

rmetzler5y ago· 1 in thread

Would it be beneficial to use one channel (either audio or visual) to transmit the information and the other one for responses like acknowledge? So kind of like TCP over two different channels?

sz3OP5y ago

Well, as for acks specifically -- cimbar itself doesn't really need them, thanks to fountain codes [0].

But I can imagine a reverse (request?) channel being useful, if it had enough bandwidth for the desired application. :)

As /u/ggerganov notes elsewhere in this thread (with some expertise on the audio side -- I can't claim any), the bandwidth of any audio channel is probably going to be pretty bad.

edit: Notwithstanding how viable of an idea it might be, HTTP over audio+video would be pretty neat. :)

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fountain_code

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse