Talk:6G

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing: Networking Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force.

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 17 September 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from 6G (network) to 6G. The result of the discussion was moved.

Too many buzzwords

The article has too much marketing fluff and needs cleanup. While I'm sure someone got paid a lot of money to figure out a way to associate a future RF technology to "blockchain" and "artificial intelligence" to make some company's share price go up, it doesn't help the reader very much. Alextgordon (talk) 08:58, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fully agree.

The blockchain reference here seems spurious. The linked paper first and foremost is not an official ITU-T or 3GPP document, but rather an academic paper. Further the paper is very light on detail in terms of how blockchain can actually contribute to improvement in the areas it says it will, and offers no substantive evidence that the relevant standards bodies see it as a key part of what will be branded '6G.

I believe it should be removed unless any official documentation is available to back up the claim. Topatopranks (talk) 02:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the AI reference should also be removed unless there is a similar standards document describing how it is planned to be used for "local spectrum licensing, spectrum sharing, infrastructure sharing, and intelligent automated management". Topatopranks (talk) 02:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have made some edits to that paragraph to try and improve the article now. Topatopranks (talk) 18:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1TB/s communication over 1km requires a source

In "Terahertz and millimeter wave progress" 4th paragraph they state: "Chinese researchers (...) transmitted 1 terabyte of data over a distance of 1 km in a second". The referral is to an article, rather than a scientific paper, that states the same claim. The Chinese research is about using vortex beams to encode data in an extra dimension, which may provide up to 3x data transmission rate. They allegedly use ~100GHz waves to transmit 8000Gbits/s - such a claim if physically improbable (as far as I know, not an expert), and for the very least requires more than a pop-sci article. 212.25.82.123 (talk) 10:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

5G 91.140.28.103 (talk) 05:59, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]