Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Debate Over Neighborhood Zoning Could Hold Up Fast 5G Wireless for Years

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 88 posts

Re: The Debate Over Neighborhood Zoning Could Hold Up Fast 5G Wireless for Years

#41

Post by j_s »

bmc7505 wrote: post #31
kibwen wrote: post #18

I wonder at what point we'll start seeing people simply stop paying for in-home internet via WiFi in favor of relying solely on their mobile data package, in the same way that people stopped paying for corded phone lines and are starting to stop paying for cable television. For some reason I'm frightened at the prospect... is it because I trust my ISP more than my wireless carrier?

I've been doing this for the last 5 years. These days, we average about a 1 TB / month on 4G LTE. Somehow, we've avoided carrier throttling. Although we live in a rural area, so there is little congestion anyway. A single hotspot is sufficient for all our home internet devices. If you're going to do this, it's important to have a (preferably grandfathered) unlimited data plan.

Which carrier is this? Verizon has promised to kick anyone going over 200GB/month off completely. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/01/11...

I am being pressured by my significant other to give up my two grandfathered lines since it works out to $60/line + $80 for the plan every month, and they now offer other "unlimited" options.

Re: The Debate Over Neighborhood Zoning Could Hold Up Fast 5G Wireless for Years

#42

Post by QAPereo »

wbl wrote: post #30
konschubert wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the people living there aren't left behind too much. It is in your best interest to retain some social cohesion.

They are free to move to cities any time.

You're footing the bill? How generous.

Re: The Debate Over Neighborhood Zoning Could Hold Up Fast 5G Wireless for Years

#43

Post by reportingsjr »

QAPereo wrote: post #42
wbl wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are free to move to cities any time.

You're footing the bill? How generous.

We are footing the bill for them to live there already. Rural areas are subsidized an incredible amount to our severe detriment. There is almost no decent forested area I can get to in the Midwest and it is only getting worse. Pollution is getting worse as people move further out. People are trapped and either have to get an expensive car or deal with riding poorly set up transit for hours a day. It is ridiculous.

Re: The Debate Over Neighborhood Zoning Could Hold Up Fast 5G Wireless for Years

#44

Post by throwaway613834 »

j_s wrote: post #41
bmc7505 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been doing this for the last 5 years. These days, we average about a 1 TB / month on 4G LTE. Somehow, we've avoided carrier throttling. Although we live in a rural area, so there is little congestion anyway. A single hotspot is sufficient for all our home internet devices. If you're going to do this, it's important to have a (preferably grandfathered) unlimited data plan.

Which carrier is this? Verizon has promised to kick anyone going over 200GB/month off completely. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/01/11... I am being pressured by my significant other to give up my two grandfathered lines since it works out to $60/line + $80 for the plan every month, and they now offer other "unlimited" options.

> I am being pressured by my significant other to give up my two grandfathered lines since it works out to $60/line + $80 for the plan every month, and they now offer other "unlimited" options.

Can I ask why you're not giving it up? That price sounds really high.

Re: The Debate Over Neighborhood Zoning Could Hold Up Fast 5G Wireless for Years

#45

Post by tzs »

Severian wrote: post #40
the_evacuator wrote: post #34

My neighborhood Nextdoor is full of NIMBY on this topic. Apparently electrosensitivity afflicts some 90-95% of people who have the free time to go to city council meetings at 3pm on weekdays. Shungite pendants have been recommended to fend off the illnesses caused by radiation. Even the local school does not have wifi because some local bozo said his kids were "injured" by EM fields, not just any fields but specifica…

I hate these idiots. I got into an argument with one who was concerned with the RF from their smart electric meter. I tried to explain the difference between ionizing radiation and non-ionizing, DNA 'damage', and such. No such luck getting through to them even when presented with scientific fact. I usually tell them they should be more concerned with sun exposure than anything, if they are worried about DNA damage. I…

There are a couple of known mechanisms by which non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation can be dangerous to biological systems.

One is by heating of tissue caused by absorption of EM radiation. This one can probably be safely ignored in almost all normal situations.

Another is by inducing currents and fields in parts of the organism which could disrupt normal operation.

For example, DNA is conductive, and its shape makes it act like a fractal antenna which is good at allowing a wide range of EM radiation to induce currents in it [1].

Damage and errors in the DNA can change the conductivity, and there are some researchers who think that the cell may use this as part of the mechanism that detects and deals with such damage. Induced currents from an external EM wave could cause such a mechanism to miss some damage, and so fail to detect and kill a cell that normally would have been eliminated.

Here's an article that talks briefly about some of this [2].

As far as I know it is still just speculation that the cell uses changes in conduction to detect damage. It's a plausible mechanism, but that doesn't mean it is the only possible mechanism or the one nature actually uses.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21457072

[2] https://www.caltech.edu/news/caltech-chemist-jacqueline-bart...

Re: The Debate Over Neighborhood Zoning Could Hold Up Fast 5G Wireless for Years

#46

Post by rayiner »

konschubert wrote: post #27
Yumz- wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this a bad thing? I don't understand why you think every rural backwater needs to be subsidized to the tune of billions by the productive regions of the world. We should be looking to returning 95%+ of land to nature as we urbanize more and more. I wish more companies and governments would do what the ISPs are doing. Why am I paying for post offices in rural America? Why am I paying to subsidize electricity tr…

So the people living there aren't left behind too much. It is in your best interest to retain some social cohesion.

Okay, but why do we have to foster that social cohesion in the most expensive way possible? Why demand that connectivity in these rural areas be by wireline instead of much cheaper wireless? Okay, people need access. Let’s get it done as cheaply and with as little market distortion as possible. The thing that does that is wireless.

Re: The Debate Over Neighborhood Zoning Could Hold Up Fast 5G Wireless for Years

#47

Post by [deleted] »

sandworm101 wrote: post #33
Yumz- wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this a bad thing? I don't understand why you think every rural backwater needs to be subsidized to the tune of billions by the productive regions of the world. We should be looking to returning 95%+ of land to nature as we urbanize more and more. I wish more companies and governments would do what the ISPs are doing. Why am I paying for post offices in rural America? Why am I paying to subsidize electricity tr…

Had we taken that approach a century ago most farms would never have never been electrified. It wouldn't have been worth the effort for the utilities to run the lines absent government mandates. (fyi, this has returned as a huge problem today. Utilities charge massive amounts to electrify new developments in rural areas. If it requires more than a pole or two, the cheaper option is to build your own offgrid setup. Po…

[deleted]

Re: The Debate Over Neighborhood Zoning Could Hold Up Fast 5G Wireless for Years

#48

Post by tcas »

luckman212 wrote: post #36
Yumz- wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not uncommon here in Turkey. I end up using my iPhone as a modem via USB tethering often. Mobile internet is much faster in Turkey (100+ mbs for cheap) than the wired network. It only adds ~10ping and can handle anything. I'm willing to bet this will be the norm worldwide when 5G rolls out. Here in Turkey we have '4.5G' which is a marketing term for the latest generation 4G infrastructure. We only got 4G last…

Really? I just returned from a 2-week vacation in Turkey (Izmir, Cesme) and I was lucky to get working internet at all roaming on Turkcell. When it did connect, the speeds were ~4 mbps (iPhone6s - Verizon). Not sure if that's just because I was roaming.

If you were roaming then all your data is being tunneled back to the US to Verizon's network / a US IP.

It's very possible that Verizon is limiting your bandwidth so that they don't have to pay the Turkish providers as much for the network usage.

In addition, you are probably getting QoSed by the provider itself.

Re: The Debate Over Neighborhood Zoning Could Hold Up Fast 5G Wireless for Years

#49

Post by QAPereo »

reportingsjr wrote: post #43
QAPereo wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're footing the bill? How generous.

We are footing the bill for them to live there already. Rural areas are subsidized an incredible amount to our severe detriment. There is almost no decent forested area I can get to in the Midwest and it is only getting worse. Pollution is getting worse as people move further out. People are trapped and either have to get an expensive car or deal with riding poorly set up transit for hours a day. It is ridiculous.

So it's not that they're free to move, it's just that you resent their very existence.

Re: The Debate Over Neighborhood Zoning Could Hold Up Fast 5G Wireless for Years

#50

Post by throwaway613834 »

tzs wrote: post #45
Severian wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate these idiots. I got into an argument with one who was concerned with the RF from their smart electric meter. I tried to explain the difference between ionizing radiation and non-ionizing, DNA 'damage', and such. No such luck getting through to them even when presented with scientific fact. I usually tell them they should be more concerned with sun exposure than anything, if they are worried about DNA damage. I…

There are a couple of known mechanisms by which non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation can be dangerous to biological systems. One is by heating of tissue caused by absorption of EM radiation. This one can probably be safely ignored in almost all normal situations. Another is by inducing currents and fields in parts of the organism which could disrupt normal operation. For example, DNA is conductive, and its shape ma…

Thank you for posting this!
Post reply on HN