If only the next line wasn't: "Laboratory tests have shown theoretical speeds of up to 224Gbps".
Which is still not 100X from all wi-fi (more like 10x), but it indeed is 100x faster than the wifi speeds most see in practice.
So you're comparing the theoretical speeds in lab tests to actual speeds in the real world of older wifi tech? That's not really a fair nitpick.
I'm not. The article is. I just explained their probable reasoning -- and that the 100x doesn't refer to the 1Gbps speed since they go on to talk about higher possible speeds.
I've come to take the BBC's tech reporting with a pinch of salt.
You can rely on the BBC to give you the right time and roughly what the weather was like yesterday. Otherwise forget it.
Given that everyone else's reporting is worth the same or even less, I wonder where do you still find salt for all of that? I've run out of mine long ago.