Live data from Hacker News

5G Just Got Weird

spectrum.ieee.org

141–150 of 300 posts

Re: 5G Just Got Weird

#141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Around 2000, I was working at OracleMobile, attened 3GPP/Mobile Congress/etc meetings, and there was a similar discussion around 3g. People were like "what's the killer app"? At the time, most phones were WML/WAP and Blackberry-like SMS/MMS/Email experiences. People speculated "maybe music or video", but it was all very vague, no one imagined the smartphone revolution that brought all of these services, like Uber. I'…

But your case what enabled the emergence of mobile apps and associated markets was the apparition of affordable smartphones -that's what created a new ecosystem for tech and pseudotech companies to grow in. What new market is 5g enabling?

> What new market is 5g enabling?

The more interesting feature in 5G is the signalling for IoT devices, those that wake up infrequently. Metering devices, handheld payment devices, patient home monitors, security systems, Airton, etc.

5G isn't really about more bandwidth but always on and more efficient use. This will enable more than just phones and a few tablets.

Re: 5G Just Got Weird

#143
post #83
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing the Test and Measurement industry is looking forward to, is being able to have extremely high bandwidth (wireless) connections between gear. The idea is that with 5G you can combine your function generate with your oscilloscope to form a basic network analyser with the data travelling wireless between themselves and your computer. The throughput is high enough, and there wouldn't be any wires.

Many manufacturer demos tend to be soma variant of that: ie. replacing LXI or some kind of RT-ish fieldbus with 5G. I somehow fail to see any point in making such things wireless.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoRJOCdNahc (From this series of interviews)

I think the idea is that they have identified it as an area where they can make productivity gains. If the throughput is there it has obvious in-the-field applications i.e. Who actually enjoys fucking around with cables before you even wire up the DUT - if you want to automatically (say) measure the efficiency of a power supply over some parameter you have to do it by hand (SCPI takes too much time)

Re: 5G Just Got Weird

#144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, parent cited _business_ Gigabit. You're talking about retail consumer connectivity. Totally different things. Based on my deep knowledge of connectivity options here in rural Montana parent is correct: there's lit fiber all over the place (certainly to all cell towers) and various telcos will trench up to 5km from any of those pops, for a price. So a business looking to acquire Gigabit connectivity can readily ac…

I shall tell my friend about that. Thank you for the information!

There is also a website that documents where local schools get their internet from. You can also use those to find out potential providers. I'll try to find a link.

Found it: https://www.compareandconnectk12.org/

Re: 5G Just Got Weird

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Around 2000, I was working at OracleMobile, attened 3GPP/Mobile Congress/etc meetings, and there was a similar discussion around 3g. People were like "what's the killer app"? At the time, most phones were WML/WAP and Blackberry-like SMS/MMS/Email experiences. People speculated "maybe music or video", but it was all very vague, no one imagined the smartphone revolution that brought all of these services, like Uber. I'…

But your case what enabled the emergence of mobile apps and associated markets was the apparition of affordable smartphones -that's what created a new ecosystem for tech and pseudotech companies to grow in. What new market is 5g enabling?

No, it's more than that. There was no YouTube in 2000. Web video for wired connections was shitty. MPEG-2 was the codec dujour. Progressive Networks/Real Networks was people's conception of online video. Netflix was shipping DVDs by snail mail. If the iPhone existed in 2000, there still couldn't have been a TikTok.

AR glasses for example, could totally upend all of this and require 5G low latency, and fast accurate positioning. Yes, 5g when it arrives next year, won't change anything. However, 7 years from now, it may be the enabling platform for AR glasses the way 4g LTE was the enabling platform for smartphones.

Really, how useful was a 2g (Edge) iPhone without a wifi connection?

Re: 5G Just Got Weird

#146

Uhh, I'm not sure what that was but I tried to access that site via Tor and on the particular exit node I was on I got back a "418 I'm a teapot" response. Yeah, it got weird.

Well, it's probably a teapot!

> The HTTP 418 I'm a teapot client error response code indicates that the server refuses to brew coffee because it is, permanently, a teapot.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status/418

Re: 5G Just Got Weird

#147
Good article but I continue to feel like for whatever use cases 5g is fit to serve, it seems likely to be a limited technology, used only by heavyweight giant companies. Unlike other communications bands, there is no intent to make any of this at all consumerly accessible.

Re: 5G Just Got Weird

#148

Not exactly on topic: There have been a few HN submissions in the past linking to papers concerned with the effect of 5G on insects. As a layperson I was not able to evaluate those papers. But if anyone knows if there was any kind of consensus reached about that, or even if this is something that anyone serious is concerned about, I would appreciate the pointer.

Hopefully not something to fuel conspiracy theorists with more reasons to burn down mobile towers like what has been happening in the UK recently.

Re: 5G Just Got Weird

#149

Someone debunk this for me please: http://www.5gappeal.eu/about/ Edit: I'm legitimately looking for good sources on this. Not trolling.

What is supposed to be debunked? The main claim seems to be:

> RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment.

Which... is true-ish? That's a bit like saying water is harmful to the environment and humans. For sure it is, if it's rushing at you with incredible velocity and mass (power). Electromagnetic radiation could certainly harm a human - with enough power. Drinking a glass of water or sending a ~100mW 2.5ghz or ~50mW 5.0ghz signal at your body is harmless.

Maybe a better example is solar radiation or sound, which is much more similar to a 5ghz signal (re: invisible radiation). A bit of sunlight is probably good for you - intense, unfiltered, high-powered UV light could roast the whole earth.

A good study to dive into some of the effects of 5GHz/100mW radiation would be https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6765906/

A good snippet:

> The three in vivo investigations addressed a variety of issues including acute effects on muscle contraction, skin-reflection properties (which are more of a dose-related than health-related issue), and skin cancer [19,54,57]. The rat skin cancer study (one to two weekly, short-term exposures at 94 GHz, 1 W/kg; DMBA-initiated animals) did not show any positive outcome [54]. Another study examined the muscle contraction of mice and described some responses [19]. Again, 94 GHz was used, but power density or SAR values were not reported.

So at incredibly high power (94GHz / 1W/kg - thousands of times more powerful than what we're talking about with 5g) there were no positive outcomes for a skin cancer test. It was possible to stimulate muscle contraction, which makes total sense: pump enough electricity through the air to contract a muscle. But mammal bodies are great at insulation (our skulls are amazing at protecting us from rouge radiation).

The same study is also mentioned in this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial_System and (https://www.wired.com/2009/08/pain-ray-first-commercial-sale...) which is about "pain guns" - systems that use radiation to inflict pain from a distance. It mentions a beam power of 30 kilowatts! That's 300,000x more powerful, and the weapon doesn't work if the person is wearing a thick sweater. It takes a _ton_ of power to interfere with organic objects.

Edit: I do want to say that I think more investigation should be done re: radiation pollution and it's impact on micro-biology, insects, birds, etc. Humans are really resilient, but it's not super clear that for example, some algae might not respond to low levels of radiation in interesting ways. My intuition says it's unlikely, as there is tons of low level radiation flying around in nature - 5g isn't some new, different kind of energy, but further study should be done, absolutely. I'd suspect light radiation is far more dangerous to bugs and bacteria than 5g though.

Re: 5G Just Got Weird

#150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lol! You still find cockroaches around regardless of wi-fi or 4g signal

Clearly he doesn't. Do you?

I live in Madrid, which is a fairly clean city compared to other places I’ve lived. We have loads of roaches, especially in the summer. We also have absurd 4G and Wifi coverage. I can only connect to the 5ghz Wifi band at home because 2.4 is saturated by the neighbors. There are still roaches where I live...

Funny thing, in the house where I grew up, I saw the same phenomenon as GP. We had constant roach infestations in the kitchen, and after years of different chemical treatments, they were suddenly gone for good. Always attributed it to an effective chemical or a random biological process. Still see them in other places in the city nevertheless.

Why are we even entertaining this on Hacker News though? Show me the papers, GP’s anecdotes or mine are worthless.

Post reply on HN