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

Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 433 posts

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#111

Post by jodrellblank »

renaudg wrote: post #78
asciident wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything I've heard about it indicates that it's a trash technology. Unless you're standing next to an emitter, it's no faster than 4G and potentially even slower. Like you walk one block or behind a wall and it's not good anymore. So you gotta put one of these up on every block. I'm banking on it being a complete dud, like 3D televisions.

Maybe you'll be interested to hear from actual 5G users before making uninformed claims. I have home wireless broadband in central London (no other good broadband offering in my street) and was upgraded from 4G to 5G last week. I went from an average of 5-10Mbps at peak times and 20Mbps max on 4G, to 150-250Mbps peak time and 350MBps max on 5G, on the same carrier (Three). Enough said.

"Maybe you'll be interested to hear from actual 5G users instead making uninformed claims."

Claims from "what I've heard" /are/ informed claims; your anecdotal information doesn't automatically beat other people's anecdotal information.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#112

Post by apcragg »

jodrellblank wrote: post #107
apcragg wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have heard wrong - it's amusing that you're so confident in its failure despite having the wrong information. There are two phases in the 5G NR standard. The first phase relies on some elements of the LTE control plane to coordinate data services. These data services use new numerologies for their OFDM modulation, vastly more flexible resource block, allocation, improved error control coding, lower maximum latenc…

it's amusing that you're so confident in its failure despite having the wrong information. Why would that be "despite"? That would have to be being confident in its failure despite having information that it would be a success. Surely they're confident in its failure because the information they have says it will be bad? And then your comment becomes "I'm laughing because you're confident in your beliefs" which is co…

Being confident enough to trash-talk based on hearsay is just being arrogant.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#113

Post by asciident »

renaudg wrote: post #78
asciident wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everything I've heard about it indicates that it's a trash technology. Unless you're standing next to an emitter, it's no faster than 4G and potentially even slower. Like you walk one block or behind a wall and it's not good anymore. So you gotta put one of these up on every block. I'm banking on it being a complete dud, like 3D televisions.

Maybe you'll be interested to hear from actual 5G users before making uninformed claims. I have home wireless broadband in central London (no other good broadband offering in my street) and was upgraded from 4G to 5G last week. I went from an average of 5-10Mbps at peak times and 20Mbps max on 4G, to 150-250Mbps peak time and 350MBps max on 5G, on the same carrier (Three). Enough said.

I appreciate your perspective but I did base my comments on what actual 5G users told me. Here's a video review that captures about what I said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CTUs_2hq6Y

But I will add your data point to my opinion of 5G.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#114

Post by rgrieselhuber »

apcragg wrote: post #105
rgrieselhuber wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you work in the industry?

Not for the big telecomm's but I design parts of the radios and DSP algorithms implementing the major cellular technologies.

What are your thoughts on the safety concerns?

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#115

Post by jodrellblank »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #58
_bxg1 wrote: post #33

There's such weird marketing zealotry behind 5G. They're acting like it's going to completely reshape society, but at best it's just... faster internet. In places where the internet is already pretty fast. I can only assume it's a mixture of political and economic stakeholders that have their own reasons for really wanting it to succeed (looking competitive against China, selling new phones, etc.)

> at best it's just... faster internet Counterpoint: streaming audio and video were singularly enabled by faster internet. That is restructuring multibillion-dollar industries. The iPhone, one could argue, and through it real-time social media, are products of mobile internet. There are legitimate new capabilities that will likely erupt from cheaper, faster mobile internet. If the playground is in Shenzhen versus Sil…

Counter counterpoint, humans have ears and eyes and already have streaming audio and video. Those things were clearly desirable and now possible.

What are the legitimate new capabilities you're thinking of, which many people desire, but can't have primarily because of (mobile) internet speeds?

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#117

Post by wongarsu »

clairity wrote: post #62
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> at best it's just... faster internet Counterpoint: streaming audio and video were singularly enabled by faster internet. That is restructuring multibillion-dollar industries. The iPhone, one could argue, and through it real-time social media, are products of mobile internet. There are legitimate new capabilities that will likely erupt from cheaper, faster mobile internet. If the playground is in Shenzhen versus Sil…

pervasive AR/VR is supposed to be the killer app for 5G, but i'm personally not excited about it (à la 3D TV). just give me the lower prices we were promised by the carrier oligopoly in exchange for all those governmental concessions (not holding my breath).

Sure, livestreaming videos to VR headsets would be great, and the desirable 2x8k@120hz would require 5G. But if that's the use case then there's no need to hurry with 5G since most applications would be just fine with local wifi and haven't proven significant demand.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#118

Post by yborg »

lostmsu wrote: post #47
superkuh wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, specifically the sub-6GHz C-band that it is basically ripping out of the hands of traditional radio media companies (ie, npr, etc) that use it for satellite distribution of radio shows. There's been a lot of complaints from radio people about this but the telcos have more money so they'll get it.

Which also makes total sense to me: I use radio maybe once a year, mobile data once an hour.

I don't use a wheelchair at all, but I see value in having laws that mandate accessibility. Public policy needs to be set on the basis of societal goals, not individual impulses.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#119

Post by renaudg »

Really surprised to see the beating heart of tech that is HN turn into a luddite forum on this occasion.

Last week I got upgraded from 4G to 5G for home broadband here in London, UK. It just became commercially available in my area (on Three)

As I said in another comment, my average speeds went up from 5-10Mbps to 150-250Mbps and peak ones from 20-25Mbps to 350-400Mbps.

It absolutely is the game changer it's advertised to be in terms of enabling new real-world use cases.

Remember how video streaming was theoretically possible on 3G but totally shit in practice until 4G came along ? 5G is a similar kind of step up. You can expect an order magnitude more bandwidth on mobile than with 4G, and that matters.

In other words : the hype is real.

Re: Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics, and FCC Bullying

#120

Post by dontbenebby »

_bxg1 wrote: post #33

There's such weird marketing zealotry behind 5G. They're acting like it's going to completely reshape society, but at best it's just... faster internet. In places where the internet is already pretty fast. I can only assume it's a mixture of political and economic stakeholders that have their own reasons for really wanting it to succeed (looking competitive against China, selling new phones, etc.)

>There's such weird marketing zealotry behind 5G. They're acting like it's going to completely reshape society

It won't reshape society, but it could reshape geopolitics.

The US has had a unique position to monitor the internet thus far. With 5G that could shift (if large swathes of the world use Chinese hardware).

Post reply on HN