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

Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now

brusselstimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 144 posts

Re: Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now

#101

Post by nvahalik »

stevev wrote: post #88
holografix wrote: post #32

Having lived in Brussels for a year now and witnessing sidewalks covered in trash and bad air quality I’m quite cynical of politicians waxing lyrical about protecting their constituent’s health. I think the last paragraph in that article holds more weight. “Last week, the various governments in Belgium once again failed to reach agreement on the auctioning of the 5G licences. The file remains stuck on the distributio…

I’ll take trash and bad air quality over cancer.

Especially since people can pick up trash. You cannot really choose what frequency your phone uses.

Re: Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now

#102

Post by dekhn »

mcguire wrote: post #84
laHiesh1 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but it seems like they might be neglecting issues that are affecting their constituents health (potentially easy to fix by the sounds of it) and focusing on the current fashionable moral panic.

Trash on the streets is fairly difficult to fix, without authoritarianism or major cultural change.

When I visited amsterdam I saw little or no trash. After watching a while, I noticed they have guys with little witches brooms cleaning everywhere (it was really interesting to watch, turns out they used to use more modern ones but they don't work as well), followed by street cleaners. The little brooms made all the difference, ferreting out all the half-cloaked garbage dropped by tourists. Seems completely routine and normal and not authoritarian.

Re: Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now

#103

Post by dekhn »

sosilkj wrote: post #58
laHiesh1 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but it seems like they might be neglecting issues that are affecting their constituents health (potentially easy to fix by the sounds of it) and focusing on the current fashionable moral panic.

"fashionable moral panic" Would you be able to share some scientific research that supports the idea that the proposed antennas are completely, without-a-doubt safe? (I assume that's what you're implying by your statment.) Edit: ok, forget that I used the words 'completely' and 'without-a-doubt' which causes a knee-jerk reaction amongst the armchair epistomologists here. How about just evidence in general that sugges…

guaranteed complete safety is not a goal; it;'s not economic. All the matters is that it is shown to be Safe Enough for the Value it Provides, and nobody has demonstrated it is not safe enough.

Re: Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now

#104

Post by Wowfunhappy »

wongarsu wrote: post #96
chii wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Once 8k streaming 8k on a mobile device doesn't seem all that logical imho. 720p or 1080p is already pretty good on a tiny screen.

Many people hold their phone much closer to their face than a TV or regular monitor. Screen size is irrelvant, what's important is how much of your field of vision is taken up by the screen. I would argue phones are even the device where 4k and 8k make the most sense because of how close you can get to them without effort.

> Many people hold their phone much closer to their face than a TV or regular monitor. Screen size is irrelvant, what's important is how much of your field of vision is taken up by the screen.

This makes logical sense, but isn't the case in my experience. Many games look noticeably better on my Switch's 720p screen than on my larger 1080p monitor, despite running at native resolution (720p handheld vs 1080p docked) on each.

Re: Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now

#105

Post by darkpuma »

mrtksn wrote: post #52
laHiesh1 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but it seems like they might be neglecting issues that are affecting their constituents health (potentially easy to fix by the sounds of it) and focusing on the current fashionable moral panic.

Well, that's up to voters to decide. Maybe Brusellians don't mind some trash on the streets as much as new tech's potential hazards. It's not too long ago since establishing a link between cancer and EM Radiation[0]. You say that it's fashionable moral panic but some people may say that an increase in cancer is not worth fashionable network tech investment. Just as you might think that this 5G thingy is a must have a…

> "Well, that's up to voters to decide"

As I understand it, Brussels is governed by a parliamentary system, not a direct democracy. The advantage of such a system, in theory, is that these representatives can have cooler heads than the mob of common rabble outside.

Re: Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now

#106

Post by _0w8t »

fauigerzigerk wrote: post #98
mrtksn wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree on "how it should be" but there are no mechanics to enforce anything other than popularity and you don't get popular by saying things that people don't want to hear. That's how we got our bubbles in social media anyway. I guess if you still want to keep the democracy and have your 5G in Brussels you better convince enough Brusselians that the speed increase in networking is worth risking more cancer…

Representative democracy, independent institutions (courts, central banks, etc), the rule of law, the constitution, international treaties, human rights, crime/rioting/revolution, and most of all the truth are all "mechanics" that put a break on making every single issue a simple popularity contest. But when I said that I didn't want to rely on average voters' risk percpetion, I didn't actually mean any of that. I me…

You need to wait 30 or more years for the truth. Any effects if any will be highly non-linear and chronic exposure may be harmful only if one experience it for many years.

Re: Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now

#107

Post by _0w8t »

laHiesh1 wrote: post #65
sosilkj wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"fashionable moral panic" Would you be able to share some scientific research that supports the idea that the proposed antennas are completely, without-a-doubt safe? (I assume that's what you're implying by your statment.) Edit: ok, forget that I used the words 'completely' and 'without-a-doubt' which causes a knee-jerk reaction amongst the armchair epistomologists here. How about just evidence in general that sugges…

I'm open to the possibility they're not safe if and only if the proper evidence is provided. As it stands, no peer reviewed evidence has being provided to show that there is a casual link between radio waves emitted by cellular equipment and cancer diagnosis.

For 100 years there was no peer reviewed journals that stayed that trans fats was bad. Yet it turned out they were really bad.

Re: Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now

#108

Post by driverdan »

SlowRobotAhead wrote: post #94
artificialLimbs wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't just feel cell phone radiation, it has a visible effect on my body. If I'm carrying a cell in my pocket or near my legs, some of the muscles (I believe it's the muscles) in my legs will begin to vibrate, as though they are having spasms. This happens very frequently when I have my mobile data turned on and the phone near my legs. When mobile data is off, it doesn't happen. I'd be happy to show anyone this eff…

I’m not saying I don’t beleive you; just that I don’t think anyone has ever actually repusproduced cell phone sensitivity (detection) in a controlled environment. How would you know if it’s just in your head?

> How would you know if it’s just in your head?

Please don't say "just" in your head. It's implying that psychological conditions aren't as significant or real as physical ones. They are very real and need to be treated just like anything else.

Re: Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now

#109

Post by AnthonyMouse »

andybak wrote: post #99
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not really the question though. If you have someone eat food contaminated with lead or mercury, they may not be able to taste the difference, but that doesn't mean it's harmless. The question isn't whether you can immediately sense its presence, the question is the effects of sustained exposure. And the fact that the placebo effect is a real thing doesn't really tell you that one way or the other.

Except we're specifically replying to a comment from someone claiming they could feel 5G.

> Except we're specifically replying to a comment from someone claiming they could feel 5G.

By standing next to the tower. That is a known effect from high power radio transmitters. You can feel that because it's starting to cook you the same way a microwave oven does, to varying degrees depending on the transmitter power. If you stand too close to a large military RADAR transmitter it can kill you dead on the spot.

Then the response is referring to studies done at the power levels of an individual cell phone, and no surprise it's difficult to feel that. But the effects of long term exposure are a different matter.

Moreover, with 5G they're increasing the density of the towers, which implies building towers with closer proximity to people.

Re: Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now

#110

Post by darkpuma »

artificialLimbs wrote: post #91
hannob wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

have you also tried to blind-test standing beside one that's switched off and on? Because plenty of people say they can "feel" cellphone radiation (so-called electrosensitivity), yet noone has ever been able to show this under controlled scientific conditions. As soon as they don't know if the radiation is there they stop feeling it.

I don't just feel cell phone radiation, it has a visible effect on my body. If I'm carrying a cell in my pocket or near my legs, some of the muscles (I believe it's the muscles) in my legs will begin to vibrate, as though they are having spasms. This happens very frequently when I have my mobile data turned on and the phone near my legs. When mobile data is off, it doesn't happen. I'd be happy to show anyone this eff…

If that were actually true, it would be an incredible medical discovery.

The muscles in your legs that are effected, are they biological muscles? Your legs aren't the artificial limbs your username is referring to, are they? Your story is much more plausible if your legs are artificial.

Post reply on HN