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

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

#171

Post by liability » Sat, Aug 24, 2019, 5:39 PM UTC

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #157

delecti wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously sentiments like "640 KB is enough for everyone" hilariously failed to predict the value of faster and more powerful computers. At the same time, most people's personal use of computers hasn't kept up with the capabilities of the high-end of consumer grade products. Lots of people only really use a web browser, and even an ad-infested website will run fine on most 10-20 year old computers. You can say "we do…

> most people's personal use of computers hasn't kept up with the capabilities of the high-end of consumer grade products Increasingly, consumers don’t even own a personal computer. (Unless we’re being pedantic and calling our phones PCs.) Asking what a PC will do with faster mobile internet will be misleading.

I feel that you're deliberately missing the point. Most users don't max out their '4G' connections either.

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

#172

Post by deanCommie » Sat, Aug 24, 2019, 5:39 PM UTC

liability wrote: post #158

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The efficiency of flash doesn't matter much if I have to wait for it to physically get to me, vs just opening up my browser.

People binge-watching a TV series could certainly anticipate their near-future media demands and download the series through means other than cellular networks. Downloading video and storing it on flash memory could eliminate a huge chunk of the demand for streamed video.

They could, but...they don't want to. So they won't!

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

#173

Post by dubliner2077 » Sat, Aug 24, 2019, 5:40 PM UTC

Drop my mind monthly bill and fuck 5g, I have all the speed I need and more than 64k RAM for my Phone.

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

#174

Post by chvid » Sat, Aug 24, 2019, 5:40 PM UTC

rorykoehler wrote: post #156

inimino wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> drawing a wire to connect a button to a light How are you getting power to the light?

Wirelessly?

Or a battery maybe? I don't know ... if you try to think ahead of what is within the realm of physics but not yet economically or technologically viable there are actually quite a few possibilities.

For the record. I don't think that there will be a physical sim card in your bathroom light but I think that all these wireless communication standards (infrared remote controls, wifi, bluetooth, 4g mobile data ...) will converge into one and the use of that will be so cheap that it will be used everywhere.

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

#175

Post by liability » Sat, Aug 24, 2019, 5:41 PM UTC

deanCommie wrote: post #172

liability wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People binge-watching a TV series could certainly anticipate their near-future media demands and download the series through means other than cellular networks. Downloading video and storing it on flash memory could eliminate a huge chunk of the demand for streamed video.

They could, but...they don't want to. So they won't!

You don't know that. Currently consumers don't have the (legal) option, so extrapolating their current behavior to their potential desires is fallacious.

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

#176

Post by paul7986 » Sat, Aug 24, 2019, 5:41 PM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #127

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…

Faster, yes. But "cheaper" is just marketing hype. There's no way the telecom companies are going to pass any potential savings on to any end user. Shareholders will poop a brick if they adopt technology that reduces RPU.

But it will or should bring competition to Comcast and cable companies alike!

Who doesn't want more options for home broadband?

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

#177

Post by michaelmrose » Sat, Aug 24, 2019, 5:41 PM UTC

wongarsu wrote: post #117

clairity wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

You can't necessarily prove demand for even retroactively obvious products without the products sometimes. I don't think VR is something you are extremely likely to do on the go.

AR on the other hand has potential.

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

#178

Post by Waterluvian » Sat, Aug 24, 2019, 5:43 PM UTC

_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.)

My sense is that this is all completely driven by the need to have something new to sell.

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

#179

Post by [deleted] » Sat, Aug 24, 2019, 5:43 PM UTC

konschubert wrote: post #166

_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.)

It’s basically a bunch of glorified WiFi hotspots.

[deleted]

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

#180

Post by fyfy18 » Sat, Aug 24, 2019, 5:44 PM UTC

kube-system wrote: post #135

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This editorial was written within the context of countries. I understand why Verizon wants to get 5G before AT&T, but I don’t think the US should allocate public resources to help. If the result is that China gets 5G before the US, fine.

I’m not sure the US should allocate resources to do that either. But that’s irrelevant, all countries have an interest in the success of their industry, and the strength of their utility infrastructure. These things have been a matter of political interest for millennia.

But what's the failure case here? The US corporations end up buying more mature technology that's already been tested and funded by other nations?