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

Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

thehill.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 224 posts

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#151

Post by asdff »

takeda wrote: post #101
nxc18 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So I can use my mapping application when I’m in the park. So I can look up an earthquake that just happened when I’m in the lobby of a movie theater (that really happened, and the 4G network really is not capable of handling any sort of crowd at least not in my area).

I live in LA and don't have this issues with crowds disabling me from using 4G. Regarding the earthquake, yes it is common that you can't access SCEC website right after an earthquake, but this is not a problem with 4G. You can have 10 gbps over fiber and the site still won't be accessible, because the site itself is bogged down by the traffic.

Also in LA and I find 4G is not very reliable. Who is your carrier? I use verizon. Speeds are bad and my connection drops all the time. I'm by ktown so maybe it's the density at play compared to other areas.

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#153

Post by mcguire »

nxc18 wrote: post #80
_bxg1 wrote: post #45

I have yet to hear anyone who's not a telecom CEO or a politician say they actually want 5G

I want 5G. There, you heard it. I’m not a telecom CEO and I’m not a politician. Edit: I want fast, reliable telecommunications everywhere I go. I want ultra fast reliable telecom in crowded cities. I want cellular that is competitive with cable internet. I want bandwidth available for IoT devices.

Everywhere you go? What was the range of 5G, again?

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#154

Post by close04 »

danaliv wrote: post #124
ohazi wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

5g uses more power, not less.

I don’t think that was the point of the analogy. s/more power-efficient/better/

> /better/

5G is better. When the vision is finally realized. In the meantime you get a brand new washing machine that costs double, only works when you're next to it, and the spin cycle must be done in the old one. And by the time it's actually better you have to buy a new one anyway.

5G was rushed in a way 3/4G weren't because smartphone sales are slowing down. This is not the usual "there are some hiccups at the beginning" type of thing. As it is today it's rushed and half-baked.

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#155

Post by mcguire »

asdff wrote: post #149
FlyMoreRockets wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I want fast, reliable telecommunications everywhere I go. Don't leave the city then. 5G has very limited range and doesn't work in rural areas where there aren't enough customers to provide needed geographical coverage.

Will it even be good in the city? I live in a city and 4G is pretty crap. Drops the connection all the time, speeds are poor, latency is high.

My understanding is that 5G is specifically designed to improve that situation, at the expense of things like range and building penetration.

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#156

Post by sa46 »

MR4D wrote: post #12

An interesting threat vector arises here for Huawei... Ignore all the stuff about backdoors and such for a minute. I wonder if the administration fears that Huawai could simply attenuate their cell tower signals at a high wattage to disrupt all sorts of things. I never thought of that before - "5G as a weapon". Definitely a weird world. I need to start reading Judge Dredd again to start getting caught up on the futur…

You might like Ghost Fleet [1] (or [2] for more colorful review). Ghost Fleet is essentially a white paper turned into a Tom Clancy style techno-thriller on what war might look like between China and the United States. Tactics from Ghost Fleet include:

- Infected microchips from Chinese suppliers used to target and destroy the US Pacific fleet.

- Disabling GPS with anti-satellite missiles.

- Cyber attacks to disrupt the DOD communications networks.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_Fleet_(novel)

[2]: https://morningconsult.com/2015/09/08/the-defense-wonks-who-...

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#157

Post by beams_of_light »

While sometimes considered controversial for decisions made on intangible things like net neutrality, I expect the FCC would have a much better understanding of the electromagnetic spectrum than the military, and having all of them approve this tells me they see no threat to GPS from Ligado's spectrum use. Makes me wonder what the politics are behind this, especially when I see someone like Jim Inhofe involved.

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#158

Post by Avamander »

close04 wrote: post #154
danaliv wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think that was the point of the analogy. s/more power-efficient/better/

> /better/ 5G is better. When the vision is finally realized. In the meantime you get a brand new washing machine that costs double, only works when you're next to it, and the spin cycle must be done in the old one. And by the time it's actually better you have to buy a new one anyway. 5G was rushed in a way 3/4G weren't because smartphone sales are slowing down. This is not the usual "there are some hiccups at the b…

> costs double, only works when you're next to it, and the spin cycle must be done in the old one. And by the time it's actually better you have to buy a new one anyway.

You just described early GPS receivers.

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#159

Post by state_less »

leetcrew wrote: post #141
takeda wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I want cellular that is competitive with cable internet. I want bandwidth available for IoT devices. It never will be though. Whatever frequencies you can do wirelessly you can do over a wire without the interference of other users using the same frequency at the same time. Also a lot of promises 5G offers only sound good on paper. The higher frequencies don't travel well through walls (that's why it uses lower fre…

>> I want cellular that is competitive with cable internet. I want bandwidth available for IoT devices. > It never will be though. Whatever frequencies you can do wirelessly you can do over a wire without the interference of other users using the same frequency at the same time. this is true in principle, but not necessarily in practice. I suspect it will hold for the near/medium future, but I can imagine a world whe…

I agree the internet is increasingly carried over radio these days (e.g. WiFi, LTE, Satellite). Wireless still seems pretty young and crude yet. There seems to be plenty of room to grow with respect to negotiating power levels, frequency use, routing topologies and so on.

I think big fiber backhauls are still going to be a thing though.

Re: Pentagon official: FCC decision on 5G threatens GPS, national security

#160

Post by judge2020 »

kingdomcome50 wrote: post #143
nxc18 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’d like to be able to put things like raspberry pi weather sensors, etc outside of the range of WiFi. I know in a lot of places especially on larger properties, there is going to be cellular coverage but it is prohibitively expensive to install WiFi. I’m honestly tired of all of these ‘but why do you need it?’ arguments. The same was said about electricity, long before anyone envisioned dishwashers, game consoles, b…

See: https://hermiene.net/essays-trans/relativity_of_wrong.html We aren't talking about the difference between electricity and gas. We are talking about the difference between a fast cellular network and slightly faster cellular network.

Then would something like the difference between 1 gbps and 10gbps ethernet apply? In the large majority of American households that have wired computers, 1gbps could handle almost any task including fast file transfers, yet 10gbps is something you can purchase if you think you need it and using it will result in even faster speeds.
Post reply on HN