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

Bell, Telus to use Nokia and Ericsson, not Huawei, in building their 5G networks

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 200 posts

Re: Bell, Telus to use Nokia and Ericsson, not Huawei, in building their 5G networks

#131

Post by Symbiote »

dijit wrote: post #124
rrrrrrrrrrrryan wrote: post #6

I'm as much a proponent of free trade as the next guy, but I do think there's a strong argument for trying to build and maintaining one's own infrastructure whenever possible, even if it's a bit more expensive. Not just for national security concerns, but because they're big domestic projects and it's nice to have to the talent and knowledge at home.

> but I do think there's a strong argument for trying to build and maintaining one's own infrastructure whenever possible I agree. Europe should not depend on (and funnel money to) The US with Microsoft licenses for government and CPUs. All the tech we depend on comes from the US, almost nothing is home grown. Would you agree that we should have our own or are you coming from a position of North American protectionis…

Nokia and Ericsson are both European companies.

Re: Bell, Telus to use Nokia and Ericsson, not Huawei, in building their 5G networks

#132

Post by Reason077 »

humanlion87 wrote: post #49
refurb wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People complain about the lack of cell phone providers here in the US, but damn! Canada is way worse. The cost of phone plans is outrageous and the major telecoms do everything in their power to stop new entrants from messing up their gravy train.

I think it's far more difficult to build a competitive network in Canada vs the US. Canada is as big as the US, but has 1/10th the population. Building and maintaining infrastructure for low-density population areas is extremely capital intensive. I am not saying the existing Telco oligopoly is a good or ideal situation. Just mentioning that US and Canada have some differences in this regard

> ”Building and maintaining infrastructure for low-density population areas is extremely capital intensive.”

The solution is to share infrastructure in sparsely populated areas where it would be uneconomic for each operator to build it's own.

The UK, despite being vastly smaller and denser than Canada, has long had poor mobile coverage in rural areas.

The UK government is now requiring (and contributing funding towards) geographical 95% coverage by 2026. Operators will use shared rural infrastructure to achieve this.

https://www.mobileuk.org/shared-rural-network

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/shared-rural-network

Re: Bell, Telus to use Nokia and Ericsson, not Huawei, in building their 5G networks

#133

Post by dijit »

Symbiote wrote: post #131
dijit wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but I do think there's a strong argument for trying to build and maintaining one's own infrastructure whenever possible I agree. Europe should not depend on (and funnel money to) The US with Microsoft licenses for government and CPUs. All the tech we depend on comes from the US, almost nothing is home grown. Would you agree that we should have our own or are you coming from a position of North American protectionis…

Nokia and Ericsson are both European companies.

Yes, and the parent is advocating for North American equivalents.

I'm asking for European equivalents to AMD/Intel and Microsoft/Apple, which underpins our entire economy.

You could make a lesser case about Google/Facebook but realistically if they went away our governments would continue working.

If Microsoft deactivated our operating systems _or_ productivity software, our economy would be put back at least a decade.

Re: Bell, Telus to use Nokia and Ericsson, not Huawei, in building their 5G networks

#134

Post by aembleton »

abledon wrote: post #2

has anyone had to hear their crazy relatives go on about the dangers of 5G? Is there some penultimate youtube video or resource to point people to to assuage their fears?

No, but I have had a discussion with someone on the next door social network (for discussing with neighbours). I was trying to understand their objections to 5G, and it boiled down to them conflating frequency and power.

So, when they heard 26GHz, that meant 26 times more power than 1GHz. The higher frequencies are what scare them, even though they are less than visible light.

Re: Bell, Telus to use Nokia and Ericsson, not Huawei, in building their 5G networks

#135

Post by mthoms »

Lammy wrote: post #125
mthoms wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>the only thing that makes something factual is when enough people share the same opinion about it. You've got it wrong. Religion is a perfect example. What makes something factual is overwhelming evidence and expert consensus. It's not a 100% foolproof system but it's as close as we humans are ever going to get. Ideas presented by people without good evidence are not entitled to serious consideration. Especially whe…

That definition of fact is incomplete since it still depends on being able to agree on the fact of who you consider an expert.

The simple answer, once again, is we choose our experts based on evidence.

By default, the experts in any particular area are the people who have proven they are (based on evidence of education and work experience). The fun fact is, anyone can challenge an expert opinion. Just present compelling evidence that supports your claim.

It's okay to have alternate opinions, but don't try and argue they are valid just because you "chose" a different "expert" to believe. Present evidence or GTFO.

Please, go troll someone else with your circular reasoning nonsense. You're not being insightful or intellectual, you're being childish.

Re: Bell, Telus to use Nokia and Ericsson, not Huawei, in building their 5G networks

#136

Post by neoplatonian »

adventured wrote: post #42
markus_zhang wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just to note that purchasing equipment from Nokia and Ericsson doesn't mean that you are "building and maintaining one's own infrastructure". As a bonus the network is also actively listened by all state players who have the ability to do so, regardless of supplier.

> equipment from Nokia and Ericsson doesn't mean that you are "building and maintaining one's own infrastructure". More than that, it's buying from allies, both political and ideological. I regard most of Europe as a liberalism ally, I'm entirely ok with my nation's telecom gear coming from eg Germany, France, Britain, Sweden, Finland and so on. They use software from Microsoft or Adobe, and hardware from nVidia, Cis…

[flagged]

Re: Bell, Telus to use Nokia and Ericsson, not Huawei, in building their 5G networks

#137

Post by Reason077 »

sumedh wrote: post #122
humanlion87 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's far more difficult to build a competitive network in Canada vs the US. Canada is as big as the US, but has 1/10th the population. Building and maintaining infrastructure for low-density population areas is extremely capital intensive. I am not saying the existing Telco oligopoly is a good or ideal situation. Just mentioning that US and Canada have some differences in this regard

Australia is similar as well, most of the population is in few cities with huge empty outback. The rates here are around 25 USD for unlimited text and calls with around 30 gigs of data.

Right now in the UK I’m paying £30/month for unlimited 5G data. 30 day contract, 5G roaming in many European countries. I’ve seen download speeds as high as 400 Mbps.

Streaming games on my Mac from Google Stadia in perfect lag-free 1080p!

Re: Bell, Telus to use Nokia and Ericsson, not Huawei, in building their 5G networks

#138

Post by Lammy »

mthoms wrote: post #135
Lammy wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That definition of fact is incomplete since it still depends on being able to agree on the fact of who you consider an expert.

The simple answer, once again, is we choose our experts based on evidence . By default, the experts in any particular area are the people who have proven they are (based on evidence of education and work experience). The fun fact is, anyone can challenge an expert opinion. Just present compelling evidence that supports your claim. It's okay to have alternate opinions, but don't try and argue they are valid just becau…

I think my reasoning seems circular because we're talking about different things, but I doubt there's one single fact that all 8 billion of us would agree on. Let's try moving our focus of value away from the contents of peoples' beliefs and toward the knowledge that people sincerely believe them and we value the people. I agree that some beliefs (e.g. the vaccine stuff) are actively harmful, but from where I'm sitting it seems like browbeating everyone until they agree with us hasn't been working out too well these last few years. You can keep trying that and hoping for different results, but I've found more actual success in these matters by changing my own views in the way I'm describing. It's hard to have a conversation with someone who is telling you you're being insincere, ya know? :)

Re: Bell, Telus to use Nokia and Ericsson, not Huawei, in building their 5G networks

#139

Post by velox_io »

seotut2 wrote: post #123
giomasce wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, in Belgium you can get the same for around 15 EUR and in Italy you can get 50 GB for less than 10 EUR...

And in Romania you get 50GB for 2 EUR (basically the plan is unlimited data, but with speed limited to 256kbps after 50GiB.). The speeds are quite good too, I personally reached 100Mbps on 4G on my phone in some places. The 5G plan includes 80GB traffic for the same package. ++++++++++ I'm actually using this 2EUR plan as my main internet service at the moment, as I temporarily moved to the country side. I could get…

A friend of mine is Romanian, and it is impressive how good their telecommunications are managed. This is something many countries can learn from.

Here in the UK, the government has grand ambitions, but it doesn't really materialise. Most people with "fibre" broadband are limited to 20-60Mbps. Although if you live in a major city you can get 200-300Mbps.The infrastructure is ancient, and by taking half measures they spend more in the long run for far less.

This is something that annoys me about 5G. It will cost a fortune to roll out (making data so expensive it won't be fully utilised). 4G on my phone right now is 35Mbps. 5G is more a tickbox exercise than bringing better connectivity to people.

Post reply on HN