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

231–240 of 433 posts

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

#231

Post by HyperTalk2 »

_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.)

They want to be able to easily boil the organs of any target by simply typing coordinates in 3D space for multiple towers to focus their beams on. It's a weapon pretending to be a useful innocent technology so no one will protest its widespread deployment.

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

#232

Post by xxpor »

rgrieselhuber wrote: post #150
apcragg wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not my area of expertise. The main study I'm aware of showing some harmful affects uses an unrealistic amount of power and curiously only showed effects for male mice. I'm hesitant to dismiss it, because effects from heating caused by non-ionizing radiation are well documented but that amount of power is just not present in cellular systems whether that's LTE or 5G NR.

I worry in particular about the towers being in close proximity to schools and housing developments.

Do you own a microwave oven?

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

#233

Post by wideasleep1 »

agumonkey wrote: post #134
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…

I'm saddened that streaming is seen as something important. 5G may add IoT which can have value for everybody if done well (or not if it ends up as a sensation of being monitored 24/7 even without privacy issue)

It isn't for static content (songs/movies), but for active content it is. 5G should effectively redefine what streaming really is.

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

#234

Post by godelski »

_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.)

640 KB is all you'll ever need!

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

#235

Post by luxpir »

bendbro wrote: post #181
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…

> Phase 2 formally introduces millimeter wave signaling - this is what does primarily propagates through line of sight (LOS) channels. Clever beam forming and beamsteering can alleviate this to an extent but these cells are intended for dense urban environments or interiors of large buildings. Thanks for all the info. Why don't we just skip phase 2 and continue using wifi?

Fair point, my thought too. Something tells me "big telco" is too valuable to economies to sidestep with a public service/open mesh network relayed via routers and phones as nodes.

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

#236

Post by m12k »

tzs wrote: post #184

Some of the fear of 5G is driven by Russia. RT has run several segments about it. Here are some: 5G Wireless: A Dangerous 'Experiment on Humanity' [1] Could 5G put more kids at risk for cancer? [2] How To Survive Dangers of 5G [3] Cancer risk? 5G wireless speeds could be dangerous [4] ‘Totally insane’: Telecomm Industry ignores 5G dangers [5] According to the New York Times, citing a declassified U.S. intelligence re…

I can't see any way Russia benefits from the 5G hysteria directly. So I wonder if they use this as a way to screen for impressionable people in the West that they can then later use for spreading more 'useful' misinformation?

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

#237

Post by jorblumesea »

m12k wrote: post #236
tzs wrote: post #184

Some of the fear of 5G is driven by Russia. RT has run several segments about it. Here are some: 5G Wireless: A Dangerous 'Experiment on Humanity' [1] Could 5G put more kids at risk for cancer? [2] How To Survive Dangers of 5G [3] Cancer risk? 5G wireless speeds could be dangerous [4] ‘Totally insane’: Telecomm Industry ignores 5G dangers [5] According to the New York Times, citing a declassified U.S. intelligence re…

I can't see any way Russia benefits from the 5G hysteria directly. So I wonder if they use this as a way to screen for impressionable people in the West that they can then later use for spreading more 'useful' misinformation?

Really? You can't see how Russia benefits from sowing disinformation and confusion about a possible next-gen technology? One that has the possibility of adding hundreds of billions of dollars and high skilled jobs to the US workforce?

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

#238

Post by wideasleep1 »

chvid wrote: post #224
JustSomeNobody wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But at some point telecommunications technology is going to be so cheap that drawing a wire to connect a button to a light is going to be the expensive option. But it won't be cheap for the consumer. At best, our data plans will stay the same price. But more likely they'll rise and, well, I just don't think people give a crap enough about having a sim card in their TV to pay the extra. Maybe if you make SF money, b…

Where I live 4G is good and so cheap that I am thinking about dropping my DSL connection. I would still need a wifi-router as my laptop and my tv does not support 4G. But my guess is eventually those devices will support xG mobile data and my wifi-router will be a thing of the past.

Been doing this for a few years now..AT&T UL data hotspot SIM ($20.mo, aka 'Mobley' plan) plugged into a TMobile ASUS AC1900 router...tripled my speed of Sonic DSL, for 1/3 the cost of Sonic DSL. Do it.

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

#239

Post by liability »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #222
liability wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

> Most users don't Max out their '4G' connections either But sometimes, some do. That margin is what describes new opportunity.

That margin is slim. For many users, vanishingly thin.

Somebody like you or I might frequently max our our cellular connections, but I wager most users never do. And how would they? Streaming 4k YouTube videos onto a screen smaller than a postcard? It just won't make a difference for them.

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

#240

Post by m12k »

jorblumesea wrote: post #237
m12k wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't see any way Russia benefits from the 5G hysteria directly. So I wonder if they use this as a way to screen for impressionable people in the West that they can then later use for spreading more 'useful' misinformation?

Really? You can't see how Russia benefits from sowing disinformation and confusion about a possible next-gen technology? One that has the possibility of adding hundreds of billions of dollars and high skilled jobs to the US workforce?

I just finished the NYT article and it claims the move is because Russia doesn't have a 5G play, so they try to undermine everyone else's. I guess that might hold some credence.
Post reply on HN