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

51–60 of 88 posts

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

#51

Post by [deleted] »

Yumz- wrote: post #25
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?

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…

[deleted]

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

#52

Post by superkuh »

The important issue here is what exactly do they mean by Fast 5G. In many cases what they mean is femtocells using the very same frequency range as existing consumer wifi routers. The instant one of these femtocells starts operating around wifi the routers in the area will drop thoroughput drastically (ie, 80%+) due to their channel usage sensing.

Lets be clear: this is attempt to use capture and use public spectrum by pushing things like home/building wifi out and forcing everything through centralized telecom.

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

#53

Post by gnicholas »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #39
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 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. I'm surprised there hasn't been more movement in the other direction. There are very inexpensive WiFi-first phone plans ($20/month + data), whi…

It's true that many people spend 95+% of their time on wifi, but we still need to be reachable when in transit. It would be interesting if there were a super-light cellular package that only offered minimal data/calls. I think this is basically what Comcast is rolling out, using the Verizon network as a fallback. The primary method of routing calls is over your own wifi, and over xfinitywifi hotspots at many broadband customers' homes. As a result, the price is much lower than Verizon.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/8/17/16159084/comcast-xfinity-...

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

#54

Post by cshenton »

superkuh wrote: post #52

The important issue here is what exactly do they mean by Fast 5G. In many cases what they mean is femtocells using the very same frequency range as existing consumer wifi routers. The instant one of these femtocells starts operating around wifi the routers in the area will drop thoroughput drastically (ie, 80%+) due to their channel usage sensing. Lets be clear: this is attempt to use capture and use public spectrum…

So, no change then? Since those "home wifi" connections come through a centrally owned comms network.

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

#55

Post by mikeash »

martinald wrote: post #28
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?

Lots of people already do this. If you're a light/occasional internet user it makes way more sense to buy a 5GB/month dongle and use that instead vs getting hard wired broadband. This doesn't even include the fact loads of people only access the internet through a smartphone and not a computer, which means they probably won't bother with hardwired at all. The more difficult is heavy internet users. Considering an LTE…

Several years ago, Clearwire had a WiMAX network which they marketed as an alternative to home broadband in addition to the usual mobile applications. They sold a home modem that looked a lot like a standard cable modem, except there was no cable. They had an unlimited plan and advertised speeds that were not great, but acceptable. (I think 3Mbps? I had 6Mbps from Comcast at the time.)

I was so fed up with Comcast at that point that I gave them a try. Turned out they overpromised a wee bit. Before long, my speeds were throttled into the ground, in the neighborhood of 50kbps during peak times. Worse, they gave me the runaround when I tried to get it fixed, and it took me quite a while to get a straight answer about why my speeds sucked so hard. Before long I was back to Comcast. No surprise, Clearwire and their network eventually failed.

The idea of wireless broadband good enough to support routine home use is really attractive. It feels like the technology is almost there now.

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

#56

Post by [deleted] »

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.

[deleted]

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

#57

Post by marak830 »

mikeash wrote: post #55
martinald wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of people already do this. If you're a light/occasional internet user it makes way more sense to buy a 5GB/month dongle and use that instead vs getting hard wired broadband. This doesn't even include the fact loads of people only access the internet through a smartphone and not a computer, which means they probably won't bother with hardwired at all. The more difficult is heavy internet users. Considering an LTE…

Several years ago, Clearwire had a WiMAX network which they marketed as an alternative to home broadband in addition to the usual mobile applications. They sold a home modem that looked a lot like a standard cable modem, except there was no cable. They had an unlimited plan and advertised speeds that were not great, but acceptable. (I think 3Mbps? I had 6Mbps from Comcast at the time.) I was so fed up with Comcast at…

I know a few foreigners here in Japan using in home units like that. They arnt heavy users, so Hardline just isn't worth it for them.

They never complain about speed to me when I ask (then again I doubt they would even notice, unless it was really bad, not exactly techs).

I have considered it, but then again the price of a 1gb/s is so damn cheap here . . .

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

#58

Post by marak830 »

jwilliams wrote: post #16

These towers are popping up all over San Francisco. Another one got installed a few doors up a couple of weeks ago. They're hard to notice as they're generally quite well disguised. Usually just an extended bulge on top of a light pole. If it's a wooden pole, they'll paint it so it blends in. According to the local articles there is actually little recourse for locals in objecting: http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20…

Huh thanks for the photo. You're not wrong about it blending in well.

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

#59

Post by Stratoscope »

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…

Nextdoor can be interesting.

One of our neighbors posted a photo of "chemtrails" and explained her worries about the military jets that are pumping this poison into our skies. She asked if anyone had noticed the particular "X marks the spot" pattern that the chemtrails made that day targeting our neighborhood.

I said that our area (SF Peninsula) has major north-south and east-west airline traffic routes overhead, so it would not be surprising to see an occasional "X" pattern in the sky.

I also mentioned that the trails in her photo actually looked like formations of crystalline dihydrogen monoxide, and I provided a helpful link to http://dhmo.org/ where she could learn more about DHMO.

She thanked me for the post and started citing some of the information from the DHMO FAQ in her subsequent comments!

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

#60

Post by superkuh »

cshenton wrote: post #54
superkuh wrote: post #52

The important issue here is what exactly do they mean by Fast 5G. In many cases what they mean is femtocells using the very same frequency range as existing consumer wifi routers. The instant one of these femtocells starts operating around wifi the routers in the area will drop thoroughput drastically (ie, 80%+) due to their channel usage sensing. Lets be clear: this is attempt to use capture and use public spectrum…

So, no change then? Since those "home wifi" connections come through a centrally owned comms network.

It's a big change. Telco-provided wireless internet connections are not actually real internet connections. Half the time you don't even get a real routable IP address and nearly 100% of the time you don't get ports or even the ability to forward them. And that's not even mentioning the horrible data transfer limits and traffic shaping.

Whereas home connections are real, have real IPs, and have full ports that you control and generally have at least a few hundred GB of data transfer with no traffic shaping.

Post reply on HN